How Reliable is Radiometric Dating?

Question

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dating-radiometric.htm

quote:
=======================
Mt. St. Helens
The new lava dome (dacite) from the at Mount St. Helens was formed in 1986. In 1997 five specimens were taken from this dome at five different locations and subjected to conventional Potassium-Argon dating. The results indicated ages of less than one half to almost three million years old, all from eleven year old rock.

=======================

Is this true?

Answer 1

Radiometric dating is extremely reliable when it is used correctly. Anti-science propagandists like to pick out the few examples where the technique was misused in order to give the impression that the technique itself is flawed (their favorites are carbon-dating mistakes where the user didn't consider - or was actually testing - the 'reservoir effect'). This example however, is worse, as it is a case of deliberate misuse of the technique by a Creation 'scientist'.

Yes, it is true that the rocks produced such 'ages'. HOWEVER, dacite is a porphyritic rock - it contains xenocrysts of older crystals. But more importantly, Steven A. Austin (I'll name and shame) sent the samples to a lab which clearly states that their Potassium-Argon equipment cannot accurately measure samples less than two million years old!! Hence he deliberately mis-used the technique for propaganda and deception value. Disgraceful.

As well as the excellent links given above, it is worth emphasizing that there are dozens of different isotopes, with different half-lives, that can be used in radiometric dating. The different decay curves always converge on the same ages (when used as they are supposed to be used), a mathematical impossibility if there was a problem with the method.

Answer 2

there are countless approaches in use and that they supply extremely good consequences that are consistent between approaches. between the least complicated assessments is that in case you date rock layers, you will detect a progression of a protracted time. The a million/2-existence of the isotope determines the age selection for which technique is optimal. most of the failings Creationists will cite are from older innovations. a fashion or the different, they declare that the technological limitations previous to the Nineteen Seventies invalidate next consequences.

Answer 3

Yip, radiometric dating is NOT reliable, proven over and over. Now can i let you in on a secret, Each of the special dating methods (including radiometric dating) can only have accuracy IF (if!) certain assumptions ALWAYS (always!) apply to EACH specimen that is tested. These include that they assume that the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere has always been constant, and its rate of decay has always been constant. Neither of these assumptions is provable or reasonable. An illustration may help:

Imagine you found a candle burning in a room, and you wanted to determine how long it was burning before you found it. You could measure the present height of the candle (say, seven inches) and the rate of burn (say, an inch per hour). In order to find the length of time since the candle was lit we would be forced to make some assumptions. We would, obviously, have to assume that the candle has always burned at the same rate, and assumes an initial height of the candle.

The answer changes based on the assumptions.

Answer 4

yes this would be true if the material tested was contaminated with material from an earlier era. the process of mineralisation can also cause the age of fossils to come out with strange results. test subjects do not always come in pristine condition, and if great care isn't taken you will get the wrong result. some people do not take a great deal of care because it suits them not to.

Answer 5

You are going to have the bible believers wetting themselves over this. I wish your links had included some references for their statements, possibly links to the labs reports that did the testing. Even the "scientific essay" has no references or citations. It could be totally made up.

Here is something a bit better.
http://www.evolutionhappens.net/radiometric.htm

the link from the answer below mine is excellent.

Answer 6

This tale was invented by Christians as a way of making their fellow Christians doubt science.
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

Answer 7

it is as reliable as the farmer's almanac. hehehe...