Example: A young-Earth research group reported that they sent a rock erupted in 1980 from Mount Saint Helens volcano to a dating lab and got back a potassium-argon age of several million years.This shows we should not trust radiometric dating, right? The potassium-argon method, with its long half-life of 1.3 billion years, should not be used to date rocks that are only 25 years old.
The Potassium-Argon dating method suffers from both leaching and contamination problems.We believe that since evolutionists expect certain rocks to yield dates that agree with their theory, no laboratory will publish dates that are wildly out of whack, or they wouldn’t get paid for producing a result that would be hotly contested as experimental error.Woodmorappe shows that even the published results are enough to render the method as unreliable.Only rarely does a creationist actually find an incorrect radiometric result (Austin 1996; Rugg and Austin 1998) that has not already been revealed and discussed in the scientific literature.The creationist approach of focusing on examples where radiometric dating yields incorrect results is a curious one for two reasons.That is where the sample of interest is tested along with several others of the same rock type, but from different areas. Walt Brown’s book on-line at The Center for Scientific Creation.
On page 64 of his book he describes the double blind test needed to establish credibility for radiometric dating.Leaching of the parent element out of the rock would increase the age of a K-Ar sample.One way to test this would be to analyze the sample before and after soaking it under pouring water.Radiometric dating of rocks and minerals using naturally occurring, long-lived radioactive isotopes is troublesome for young-earth creationists because the techniques have provided overwhelming evidence of the antiquity of the earth and life.Some so-called creation scientists have attempted to show that radiometric dating does not work on theoretical grounds (for example, Arndts and Overn 1981; Gill 1996) but such attempts invariably have fatal flaws (see Dalrymple 1984; York and Dalrymple 2000).Roughly how old is a skeleton that has lost 90% of its carbon-14?