Problems in dating
So again I ask, can we be sure there is no dating method other than radiometric that does not depend on unproved assumptions?And if we assume that, why was helium diffusion dating performed by the RATE team? As I previously said, I agree that the RATE work provides strong evidence that the earth is young.’ I said ‘No’, and he appeared to be satisfied that if there are no better methods of dating, then these are good enough.
But these authors reached their conclusion by ignoring the contradictory data! First, the dates are readily discarded if they do not fit the preconceived notions of the experimenter.
magazine has been continuously published since 1978, we are publishing some of the articles from the archives for historical interest, such as this.
For teaching and sharing purposes, readers are advised to supplement these historic articles with more up-to-date ones suggested in the Related Articles and Further Reading below. One crystal showed a U/U date of 4.3 billion years, and the authors therefore claimed it to be the oldest rock crystal yet discovered.
In fact, the other 139 crystals show such a confusion of information that a statistician could only conclude that no sensible dates could be extracted from the data. They extracted diamonds from rocks in Zaire and found by the potassium-argon method that they (the diamonds) were six billion years old.
A further problem is that the 4.3 billion-year-old zircon, dated according to the U/U method, was identified by the U/Th method to be undatable. But the earth is supposed to be only 4.5 billion years old. They admitted, however, that if the date had not been contradicted by the ‘known’ age of the earth, they would have accepted it as valid.And why did it date granite samples at about 6000 years old? In our article Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe we include the RATE results as one of those evidences (Items 59, 60, and 61).