Who created radiometric dating Horny adult chat one on one

These included seven samples from a 150 meter long and 2 meter wide amphibolite body outcropping just upstream from the mouth of Clear Creek at river mile 84 (measured from Lees Ferry).All 27 samples were sent to two well-credentialed internationally-recognized, commercial laboratories for radioisotope analyses—potassium-argon (K-Ar) at a Canadian laboratory, and rubidium-strontium (Rb-Sr), samarium-neodymium (Sm-Nd), and lead-lead (Pb-Pb), at an Australian laboratory.Even when the calculated error margins are taken into account the different radioisotope dating methods yield completely different "ages" that cannot be reconciled—1240±84 Ma (Rb-Sr), 1655±40 Ma (Sm-Nd), and 1883±53 Ma (Pb-Pb) (see diagram).None of the obtained isochron "ages" corresponds to the "date" for any recognized event, neither the original lava eruptions nor the subsequent metamorphism.The "age" or "date" is calculated from the amount of the daughter isotope produced by radioactive decay of the parent isotope.In Grand Canyon, the "date" of metamorphism of the basalt lavas to form these Brahma amphibolites has been determined as 1690-1710 Ma (million years ago), based on U-Pb dating of minerals in the overlying Vishnu Schist and underlying Rama Schist that formed during the metamorphism.

However, the radioisotope dating of these Grand Canyon rocks clearly demonstrates that the disagreement, or isochron discordance, is pronounced.

Yet the discordance patterns are consistent with past accelerated radioisotope decay, which would also render these "clocks" useless.

Thus there is no reliable evidence to dispute that these metamorphosed basalt lava flows deep in Grand Canyon date back to the Creation Week only thousands of years ago.

Metamorphic rocks are not always easy to date using radio-isotopes.

Results obtained usually signify the "date" of the metamorphism, but they may also yield the "age" of the original volcanic (or sedimentary) rock.

Leave a Reply