 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
41 Deviations in Radiometry
|
| Menu | back |
Various radiometric methods can be used to determin the age of a rock, depending on whether the rock contains various instable (radioactive) isotopes. Generally (for reasons of costs) only one single method is used. However, if the same rock is measured using different methods, it is possible to get distinguished and systematic deviations.
Today, a number of various methods (based on radio isotopes) are used for determination of age. If the results of these methods are to be credible, they should agree at least within the usually estimated tolerance limits. As a rule, they do not even come close. Since the deviations in the measurements show systematic and repeatable deviations, a systematic error must be present in the measuring methods and/or the evaluation.
For confirmation of such observations, a piece of Cardenas basalt (a lava stone from the Grand Canyon), with a conventional age of allegedly 1.1 billion years was analyzed using four different methods (1). Here are the results:
|
| Calium-Argon: |
516 million years
|
tolerance +/- 30 million
|
on 14 specimens
|
beta decay
|
Rubidium-Strontium:
|
892 million years
|
tolerance +/- 82 million
|
on 22 specimens
|
beta decay
|
Samarium-Neodym:
|
1588 million years
|
tolerance +/- 170 million
|
on 8 specimens
|
alpha decay
|
Lead-Lead:
|
1385 million years
|
tolerance +/- 950 million
|
on 4 specimens
|
alpha decay
| |
These studies showed that specimens subject to alpha decay usually have higher age values than those subject to beta decay. (During alpha decay, helium nuclei are formed while beta decay radiates electrons). This shows that the apparent age is all the higher the heavier the atoms of the parent isotope.
Unfortunately, only few comparative measurements have been performed to date. For this reason, the statistical relevance is relatively low. On further specimens from ten different locations, the measured results differ so highly that evaluation was not possible. Others, by contrast, could be evaluated well, however yielded distinctive and systematic deviations (2).
Accelerated radioactive decay:
A possible explanation for the systematic differences is that the radioactive decay was accelerated during a certain period of time. It is imaginable that the earth’s crust was subjected to massive neutron radiation during its development and/or a catastrophic event for a limited time with an increased production of daughter isotopes.
Conclusion:
It would be desirable for public universities to perform comparative measurements to an increasing extent on materials on which various methods could be used. Since this has hardly been done to date, it is difficult to avoid the suspicion that someone does not necessarily want the results of radiometry to be questioned. When a rock is tested for its age, only one of the possible methods is used.
These 42 | Menu |
back
|
References:
|
| (1) |
Don DeYoung, Thousands… not Billions, Challenging an Icon of Evolution, Master Books, 2005, P. 126. |
| (2) |
Larry Vardiman, Andrew A. Snelling, Eugene F. Chaffin, Radioisotopes and the age of the Earth, Vol. 2, Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, 2005, P. 422. | |
| |
Comment this Site!
|
 |
|
 |
|
|