Quick radiometric dating question- misused techniques

Hey, you talkin' 'bout me?? I haven't been a good boy and looked into what was said but I think you statement above is not precisely enough worded to be correct in this particular context. What the K-Ar method will show is that a young rock is no older than the minimum date it can measure. This is, again in this context, very different than saying it is as old as the minimum date that K-Ar is good for.This is just like the inverted case of using C14 for very old materials. The date returned means that the material is at least as old as the maximum reasonable date for C14 dating methods.ABE
Once you have the results saying that the rock is no older than the K-AR minimum date then you know you need another method to narrow it down. So it doesn't matter where you start you'll end up with the right answer. You'll just waste time and money going the longer way around.Edited by NosyNed, : No reason given.

someone who actually knows what he is talking about.I have never done or seen done or even read about the details of the procedures. I made the whole thing up but it is what is true about the methods until someone who knows says otherwise .

You might know the most minute of details for C14 dating at least:If the sample's signal is lost in the background how is that reported?In the context of this discussion there is an important difference between: The sample is 50,000 years old and the sample is at least 50,000 years old.Do you have actual reports?

I caused the jump. I know that Coyote can give precise details on C14 dating but not K-Ar dating. There is a strong parallelism between them as far as the wording of reporting. We'll have to wait until someone can give other method based reports.