How reliable is science? (Assumption 4/7) (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Monday, April 16, 2012, 01:08 (4603 days ago) @ dhw

I know Tony is poking at me on these, but I want to finish my first pass before I spend time responding.-Assumption 4:-(4) One researcher, *John Joly of Trinity College, Dublin, spent years studying pleochroic halos emitted by radioactive substances. In his research he found evidence that the long half-life minerals have varied in their decay rate in the past!- "His [Joly's] suggestion of varying rate of disintegration of uranium at various geological periods would, if correct, set aside all possibilities of age calculation by radioactive methods."—*A.F. Kovarik, "Calculating the Age of Minerals from Radioactivity Data and Principles," in Bulletin 80 of the National Research Council, June 1931, p. 107.
-This isn't really an assumption. But, I already posted a link from a 2001 paper that discussed modern techniques and accuracy rates of C-14 dating, It will supercede the bulletin dated June 1931.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"