HomeОбразованиеRelated VideosMore From: Fiona Passantino

FOSSILS: how fossils are dated

281 ratings | 81620 views
Many times paleontologists will never know exactly how old a fossil is. Usually they guess its range or span of time. A good way of guessing the range is to look at the layers of rock that were formed by volcanoes. It's easier to guess the age of volcanic rock because it's brand new rock from the moment that it is spit onto the earth's surface. Many times paleontologists will never know exactly how old a fossil is. Usually they guess its range or span of time. A good way of guessing the range is to look at the layers of rock that were formed by volcanoes. It's easier to guess the age of volcanic rock because it's brand new rock from the moment that it is spit onto the earth's surface. Other dinosaurs... ARCHEOPTERYX: http://youtu.be/GudBjmi3mII DATING FOSSILS: http://youtu.be/XRW-ATOUJus DESMATOSUCHUS: http://youtu.be/lMN_JoLFkU8 EORAPTOR: http://youtu.be/Eqt7xf2Sqj8 MAIASAUR: http://youtu.be/EzvWVI-KcjE SALTOPUS: http://youtu.be/mYwhZrlacOw STEGOSAURUS: http://youtu.be/ckIHRT-SkIs SUPERSAURUS: http://youtu.be/CuIGwt34SIk TRICERATOPS: http://youtu.be/3-4UO1CD6Y4 TYRANNOSAURUS REX: http://youtu.be/u-yffxCXTi4 WHAT ARE FOSSILS? http://youtu.be/3rkGu0BItKM WHAT IS EVOLUTION? http://youtu.be/wEwnyqPMIGA WHAT IS PALEONTOLOGY? http://youtu.be/SEyl2rRa2YY
Html code for embedding videos on your blog
Text Comments (114)
Kim Jong Un (2 months ago)
Boooo, go back to newgrounds!
To check the age of a human fossil is to look at how many wrinkles they have
Yan Borysov (3 months ago)
All this analysis is bulshit , we are created by GOD what Million years? U crazy, 6 thousand years only
The Diamond Sword (3 months ago)
what the fuck have I just found..
Almighty God Servant (3 months ago)
how do they know how much does it take to uranium to become lead? , science cant prove anything, scientist give false information to avoid embarrassment because they're arrogant.
Almighty God Servant (2 months ago)
+Micael Maya-Peinl of course i can prove Almighty God, you cant prove everything in this earth , learn to accept it, what the scientists gives you are theories, not a proof. and their theories many times Wrong.
Micael Maya-Peinl (2 months ago)
+Almighty God Servant You can't prove an almighty god. You can prove the half life of chemical elements based on radioactive isotopes and nuclear chemistry.
Almighty God Servant (3 months ago)
+nunya bisnass i know what you mean, and if you think about it, you'll see that it fits my example.
nunya bisnass (3 months ago)
Daboor rrr no what I'm saying is those are two completely different disciplines with their own unrelated sets of challanges and pursuits.
Almighty God Servant (3 months ago)
+nunya bisnass if you cannot diagnose a small object, you wont be able to diagnose a very big object which is more complicated.
Wapper Jaw (5 months ago)
Seems like there a lot of assumptions and guesswork. Particularly when your testing the fossil ... seems like no matter how you look at it, your testing the rock (the minerals) in the bone if any bone is left. I call that contamination. Is there another link that explains this in better details or can somebody clear this up? How can we be testing the age of the bone when in reality were not ... your testing the age of the minerals are known to be older?
Caleb Ostrowski (6 months ago)
Matt Mann (6 months ago)
Why do they find dinosaur bones pretty much on top of the ground sometimes ? Because of there age shouldn't the be buried much deeper ??
To think the Earth is millions of years old is so absurd. There is no scientific way you could ever look at a rock and know how old that rock is. I don't care what you scan it with, what you tap it with, what you examine it with you cannot tell how old that rock is.
Bluesky (7 months ago)
The fossils were created by the great flood about 13000 years ago
Asrat Mengesha (7 months ago)
"FOSSILS: how fossils are dated" the deeper the rock the oldest is the Fossil. Wow! Do you find fossils inside rocks/stones???? So, you don't know how old the fossil is by looking at it, at least in this case???
Wow this is so dumb it's like walking blind folded and just guessing...this is even harder than believing in GOD
c.sagan (7 months ago)
Thank you
J sal (7 months ago)
so basically you guess what the age of a fossil is ?
QuickCoverLessons (7 months ago)
How did they know that Uranium 235 needs 700 Million years to turn into Lead 207 ?
Atoms Matter (8 months ago)
Really...100 to 700 mil years old?????????????????????????????????
Nasser Alhameli (8 months ago)
I do not agree!! Read about the "RATE" project
GMPLAS7 (9 months ago)
The admittance that some dating of fossils is by ´Zone Index´ - the one next to it was of a certain age so it must also be - does not inspire much confidence in the accuracy of THAT mode of geochronometry. Sounds to me like rocks being used to date fossils and fossils being used to date rocks.
nunya bisnass (3 months ago)
GMPLAS7 yes and no. Index fossils would firstly have to be established to have a known afe in the first place. You're that it wouldn't do any one any good to rely on just one method for the whole enterprise. Thats why you cross confirm with different methods, and is also why we periodically read a headline about something being older, or younger than previously thought, but its never by a great margin that would question the entirety of the results.
Jesse Collins (10 months ago)
How do you know it’s half life is?
swag town (11 months ago)
Half-life 3 confirmed boys! 1:18
Adam Court (11 months ago)
Lots of content
Billy Bob (11 months ago)
I wanna bury a fossil in that narrator.
Noob Saibot (11 months ago)
Do you think it's possible to date a rock of a known age (say 20 - 80yrs old) ?????? If you're not sure, look it up. There's many scientific papers published on comparing all the various dating methods used to day. Excluding carbon dating methods, the dates vary from 2 million years to nearly 100 million years old. These are the facts. Would you believe the rock millions of years old, if you know for a fact that it came from an eruption only decades ago? Have you seen the Nodosaur discovered recently? like many other fossils, it has soft carbon tissues, yet has been dated to 110 million years old,. this is impossible due to natural decay rate of carbon. i.e. even with immaculate preservation, the carbon should've decayed completely. Therefore, the date specified is wrong and the fossil cannot be older than several thousand years. At some point people have to acknowledge actual science flying in the face their world view and what they're told. Take WTC7 on 911; the building collapses in <7 seconds and the public are told that it burnt down, but if you look at it for what it is you'll realise what you've been told is scientifically impossible.
Efrain Martinez (1 year ago)
Who has trump
Efrain Martinez (1 year ago)
Efrain Martinez (1 year ago)
Do you believe in diabetes
Efrain Martinez (1 year ago)
kennyw (1 year ago)
After reviewing the comments below, it's obvious they're originating from a small but well organized defined group of young earth creationists. Chief among this group are Christians that represent little to no fundamental education or comprehension in the basic sciences. Otherwise, they would not ask silly and obstructionist questions. However, what they don't represent are the vast majority of Christians and scientists world-wide that do accept an old earth model of creation and evolution. Furthermore, the young earth "ministries" operational mandate is: If the science attacks our beliefs, then we attack their scientific methods. That said, your attack on mainstream science, including teaching evolution in public schools, must be met head-on with facts, not beliefs. You started this war on science and Christianity and we're fighting back. Even worse, what you do to young impressionable minds should be regarded as child educational abuse. You only get away with this willful neglect because of the protections guaranteed in the US constitution. Be aware that those same guaranteed rights also protect us not from your particular religious points of view, but from your religious coercive acts.
nunya bisnass (3 months ago)
jason sims thats a fair skeptical position given the evidence you have. Now the evidence i have tabout the earth raining for millions of years to fill up the oceans is far outdated. In fact i haven't read that hypothesis since elementary school. Theres also the hypothesis that comets brought water to our planet, and theirs just simple chemical reactions through volcanism and and other means that released water.
jason sims (11 months ago)
animus apertus triggered. As a Christian myself, my problem with evoution being taught in schools is its not complete. When they discover how life started then it would be much more helpful then writing a science book about evolution and leave out how it started. Many science books claim earth formed and rained and rained and rained for millions of years and became soup. Since we have not seen a planet form we don't know how it happened. We can only make guesses. Evolutionists want our religion out of science books but they are fine either theirs being applied to books when they are of a religion as well they just don't admit it. Evolutionism is the belief that mindless unguided objects write programming that isn't there. Altering what's already there isn't going to write programming that isn't there.
Anthony Hidcor (1 year ago)
Thats stupid as fuck.. There is no possible way anyone can know how old a piece of rock is.. It is the most inacurate thing ever
Plenty Moula SIIIKE (1 year ago)
The argument is that volcanic ash can be dated. Two problems with that one. First, the fossil must be found within the volcanic rock. Fossils are being found everywhere BUT volcanic rocks. Secondly, there is no way to tell the age of the volcanic rock components. A volcano from 200k years ago could have spit out materials from a million years ago. But the rock will only be 200k years old. I say it's time to erase the board and propose a new timeline.
nunya bisnass (3 months ago)
Plenty Moula SIIIKE what you can do is date the layers above, and below the volcanic layer. That will give you rough ballpark range for the age of that median layer. You can then narrow the age by looking at radioactive isotpes in the volcanic layer itself. Because magma circulates within the mantle of the earth, its mineral and elemental ratios will be relatively consitent, plus or minus a margin for local variances. You also never do just one test either, you do dozens while also cross confirming with other known dating methods to preserve the inegrity of the results. Sorta like when a carpenter says "measure twice, but cut once." No matter what the accuracy of the method used, you can never rely on just one tool for every job.
Marshawn Davis (1 year ago)
This is really interesting fools
What is half life and can you define the process in detail and how we calculate the date?
Sean Cherry (1 year ago)
Key word Guess!
Life (1 year ago)
thank for the vodeo. but how do know how old the index fossil is?
Canyon McCall (1 year ago)
brandaosn100 (1 year ago)
My dear, this video has several mistakes, for example, calling uranium a rock, it is a chemical element
kennyw (1 year ago)
What are the other substantive "mistakes?"
All lies...
Adrian Nelson (1 year ago)
Prove it
oelergodt (2 years ago)
I think you made a mistake. If I'm not mistaken a half-life of 700,000,000 years doesn't mean it takes 700 million years for uranium 235 to turn into lead 207. It means that if you have 1 pound of uranium 235 - 700 million years later it will have decayed into 50% lead 207. So in a situation where you found a fossil containing a 1 to 1 ratio of lead 207 and uranium 235 it would be dated 700 million years old rather than around 322 million years you mention. If there is only 25% uranium 235 to 75% lead 207 another 700 million years will have passed making the fossil 1,4 billion years old. That's based on the half life you provided, I didn't bother to double check whether or not that's the right figure :)
kennyw (1 year ago)
No, when unstable uranium-235 enters the decay chain, it radiates ionizing alpha particles (helium) until it becomes stable lead-207. So, in ~708 million years, unstable uranium-235 is half way to becoming stable lead-207.
cb7pwn (2 years ago)
it seems like there are quite a few holes in carbon dating
Jack Haveman (1 year ago)
They're not using carbon to date anything. They're using uranium. Carbon dating doesn't work on fossils as carbon's half life is only a little over 5 thousand years. Carbon dating is only used on once living tissue if found in conjunction with human artefacts.
Ruan pansegrouw (2 years ago)
This is stupid.
Rdomenico86 (2 years ago)
Yes, because the rock couldn't possibly contain lead 207 already...stupid video
Jack Haveman (1 year ago)
If you don't understand it, I'd say you've the stupid one. Your remark proves that you don't get it at all.
prem khatiwada (2 years ago)
Dоn't miss ооut оn milliоns оf s*ху girls nеаr уоu => https://twitter.com/bbb04f05a20d4c651/status/801992405775826944 FОSSILS hоw fоssils аrеeee dаted
Bulletproof1951 (2 years ago)
How long did it take for fish fossils and clam fossils to be pushed to the tops of mountains where many are found? They obviously didn't walk. Evolution is unprovable, but creation is evident to even the most casual observer. It was even stated at the very beginning of this video the evolutionists are guessing.
kennyw (1 year ago)
You are obviously the epitome of the causal observer you refer to. The amount of time it took for a fossil to migrate any distance can only be contemplated by people, like you, that have nothing better to do with your time than criticize subjects you know nothing about and attend church. No, fossils don't obviously walk and you don't obviously think. What a moron like you means when you used the guess is, in fact, an estimate in scientific terms. The word "evolutionist" is a neologism used by a minority of Christians, like you, to sound knowledgeable when they are not, which is embarrassing to more educated Christians, which accept that the earth is very old and evolution happens.
Liam Parkin (1 year ago)
Bulletproof1951 - Stupid people say stupid things.
Jack Haveman (1 year ago)
At this very moment the Himalayas are rising at an average of 2.4 inches every year. That means Mt. Everest will be 2.4 inches taller, exactly one year from now. At that rate, Mt. Everest would have been around 9100 ft. smaller, 20 million years ago than it is now and 60 million years ago, it would have been at nearly sea level. 10 million years before that, what is now the top of Mt Everest would have been under water. Plate tectonics. A very well known, observable phenomenon. They said they were guessing when it came to stratigraphy. If there are no radioactive isotopes in a specific layer, they can only estimate its age in relation to its position to other layers that can be dated due to the presence of radioactive isotopes. Radiometric dating is done using various radioactive isotopes and each isotope is incredibly consistent, when dated, to the dates of other radiometric isotopes. Stratigraphy is only used when there are no radioactive isotopes present in the layer they want to date. As an example, if your brother is 6 years older than your sister and your age is somewhere in between, then you are somewhere between 1 and 5 years younger than your brother, providing you're not a twin. That's how stratigraphy works. Not that difficult a concept....unless you don't want to understand it. Pay closer attention. If you were to be quizzed on this presentation right now, you'd fail. Don't hear what you want to hear. Hear what is being said.
goran pejakovic (2 years ago)
AAll hot girls aaaaree heeereee => https://twitter.com/4a9253cc8561450bd/status/837545169712865281
BC AD (2 years ago)
Circular reasoning and pure guesswork not science very poor video fairy tale stuff.
Adrian Nelson (1 year ago)
Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's not true.
Paul Rice (2 years ago)
The Trilobite is still the index fossil even though they find them alive today? And didn't we use the layers of the earth to determine the fossil age? Now they are using the fossils to determine the earth layers age? Aww, now I'm confused again! This is hard! It's her fault, because she forgot to say "imagine it's not circular reasoning".
Adrian Nelson (1 year ago)
Find me a living trilobite and I will give you all my money.
Jack Haveman (1 year ago)
Trilobites have been extinct for millions of years.
Paul Rice (2 years ago)
Did this video just say that they guess the range of time of a fossil? Interesting. I get it now. Guess, imagine, and pretend, then it will be science. And here I thought it was silly. I feel like a goof.
Siddarth Joji (1 year ago)
Paul Rice They don't guess like you do in a game show there are a lot of empirical data which is studied since we do not possess the technology we need to make estimate the best possible dates. At least this is the best possible answer we can get yet.
Jack Haveman (1 year ago)
The estimate (guess) a range of time, if there are no radioactive isotopes found in the layer of strata the fossil is found in. Then they have to date layers above and below the fossil that do have radioactive isotopes so they can date those layers. Then they know the age of the fossil is somewhere between the ages of the lower and higher layers of strata. And yes....that is science if scientists do this hundreds of thousands of times and keep concise records of their findings.
Paul Rice (2 years ago)
And how did the dinosaur get buried? Do we need to imagine that part, too?
Jack Haveman (1 year ago)
You don't need to "image" it. Study geology and learn how strata is formed and layered. Being intentionally obtuse does not make for intelligent questions.
Timothy Lazarov (2 years ago)
mehdi channel (3 years ago)
amazing explanation
Terry Zhou (3 years ago)
Uh...why didn't the jellyfish evolve...? Is there any fossils of the jellyfish before they have evolved into the current form? I'd like to see the fossils of the jellyfish start from when they are still single cell then all the way to its current state; if no such fossils exist, I think that's fair to say that the jellyfish fossils supports the idea of God created them because they never evolved.
nunya bisnass (3 months ago)
LILSISTR are you talking about the Schweitzer discovery? If so that doesn't matter. The minerals in bone and other materials don't have to have been 100% completely replaced by the matrix.
LILSISTR (3 months ago)
+nunya bisnass so based on that "dinosaurs "'s fossils are not fossils because they all contain soft tissue
nunya bisnass (3 months ago)
LILSISTR those aren't fossils, they're called concretions. A fossil is when the actual molecules of a material are replaced by the minerals they are encased in. The examples you provided may eventually reach that state if left undisturbed for long enough, but others won't depending in how stable those molecules are. With concretions, minerals just fill voids between fibers, fill cracks and other spaces, or just encase the object, while the original material is still very much intanct. That is not the case with fossilisation.
LILSISTR (3 months ago)
+nunya bisnass fossilization happens within hours and days-NOT MILLIONS OF YEARS as they lie,when conditions are right (high level of minerals) .There a places all over the world where people leave items to fossilize-from PAPER items to teddy bears etc-check these facts,they are pictures as well.It is not rare and its not a slow process.
nunya bisnass (3 months ago)
Many have a similar idea of how fossilisation works and dont understand the challanges of trying to find fossils, making sense of what they are, or how incredibley it is rare for fossilisation to take place, specific environmental conditions to be met, as well as it being in a location where we can find it. However a further difficulty is how types of body structures become mineralised to form fossils or create impressions. Bone and shells tend to last longer without being scavenged by other creatures, or broken down by bacteria giving more time for the conditions to be met. Something like a jellyfish despite there being billions of them in the sea right now, even one may not find its way to a place where it can fossilise for hundreds of thousands, or millions of years. This would mean that its highly likely that there could be thousands of species or intermediate species of some soft bodied creatures like jellyfish, that never had the opportunity to become fossils. A lack of fossils makes things challanging for many reasons, but that whole abscence of evidence thing isn't necessarily evidence of absence.
Oh Phoooey. Circular reasoning. Try watching Kent Hovind destroy evolutionists in debates on YouTube Just search for "Kent Hovind Debate"
james wheeler (11 days ago)
jason sims we do know how it started, you just aren’t listening
Micael Maya-Peinl (2 months ago)
Booo get out of here with your illogical arguments. Without any evidence your religions have nothing on the truth. Stop blinding humanity and move on.
Bill Ludlow (8 months ago)
Darwinian Bonobo (8 months ago)
Bill Ludlow send me that debate bro i want to laugh
Bill Ludlow (8 months ago)
Lol, watch my debate with Kent Hovind. He doesn't understand dating methods or how they work at all.
Lisa Cummins (3 years ago)
Lisa Cummins (3 years ago)
700 000 000 years !? wow really new not old
Ashraf Shaikh (4 years ago)

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.