|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,385 Year: 3,642/9,624 Month: 513/974 Week: 126/276 Day: 0/23 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How, exactly, is dating done? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5611 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
Coragyps, I don't remember seeing that it said it was disk shaped, thought it said that the Lord sits on the circle of the earth, not in the circle of the earth, it is interesting though, that Jesus said to the people you generation of vipers, other verses talk of the tongue, as to a viper, etc...
P.S. I kind of liked kjv deuteronomy 32:31-35 where it talks of their rock not being our Rock, their vine is of Sodom, and the fields of Gomarrah, their grapes are gall and bitter, their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps, and then he says is it not laid up in store with me and among my treasures. It then says that vengence belongs to the Lord, and the things that come upon them make haste. Hmmm..... poison of dragons, (komoto dragon) bacterial diseases, poison of asps, makes one wonder about STD's, Syphilis, etc...it might well be their lifestyle is the wine and the STD's (Gonorrhea, Syphilis, etc...), how the wine is the poisons of dragons and the cruel venom of asps, etc... There was another thread talking about if people believed you should test for things, perhaps everyone should get tested for STD's and have it noted, on their drivers license, if unclean state what STD's they have, so these people could be tried for assault, if they are infected with Aid's,herpes, etc...someone I knew said he didn't want to know, perhaps they need to know, and we need to know, etc...Should we not test all things, or do you change when it comes to testing you all, etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Still totally irrelevant. But one thing is worth a response.
Should we not test all things, or do you change when it comes to testing you all, etc Yes, we should test all things, and discard those that fail the tests. Your hypothesis about the age of life on Earth was tested long before radioisotope dating was invented ... and it failed the test. Life on Earth is old.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5611 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
JonF, It sure would be interesting if there is fractured rock and water under the magma chamber, I realize we probably will never know, Walts theory will likely remain a theory, etc...but that doesn't mean that the reason the rocks differed in ages is not related to argon rising up from the magma chamber, argon concentrations 20,000 times greater in the inner earth compared to atmospheric concentrations, etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
It sure would be interesting if there is fractured rock and water under the magma chamber, What magma chamber? And, of course, this is irrelevant to the subject of this thread.
Walts theory will likely remain a theory Walt's "theory" is no such thing ... if he improved it significantly, he might be able to get it up to the level of an opium dream.
but that doesn't mean that the reason the rocks differed in ages is not related to argon rising up from the magma chamber, argon concentrations 20,000 times greater in the inner earth compared to atmospheric concentrations But the evidence and observations that we have do mean that the different ages we measure for rocks are not related to your imaginary argon rising up from any magma chamber, and are not related to your fantasy of argon concentrations 20,000 times greater in the inner earth compared to atmospheric concentrations, and are not related to any of the other fictions you have posted. Until you have addressed the fact that so many totally different dating methods agree, you haven't addressed anything. Until you learn something about the subject, you will continue to be unable to make anything other than meaningless and irrelevant posts. Mods, is this thread ready for euthanasia? Mr. whatever certainly appears to be incapable of and uninterested in addressing the subject of the accuracy of radioisotope dating. [This message has been edited by JonF, 01-15-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5611 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
JonF, That wasn't my dream, it was Cornell Universities lecture that said that Ar40Ar36 is 20,000 times greater than is Ar40Ar36 in the atmosphere, you assured me that your taking contamination into context whenever you take a sample, and why your dating not the sediments, etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5700 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: The problem is your assumption that excess argon is ALWAYS a problem. It is not (the lecture also points this out as do many texts on argon-argon dating). You assume that this makes Ar-Ar useless when, in fact, the article at Cornell discusses how this information can be used to properly evaluate the age of a rock where excess argon is detected.
quote: JM: Indeed. This point was driven home by the article you cited. Every geochronologic investigation looks for problems and issues of contamination. What you've not discussed is why different methods conducted on the same rocks agree.
quote: JM: He may not be, but many others are dating sediments. In particular, U-Pb dating of carbonates is proving to be useful in a number of cases. Rb-Sr and K-Ar dating of glauconites is perhaps one of the oldest efforts at direct dating of sediments. Therefore it is not strictly correct to say that sediments are not being dated directly. Lastly, studies of detrital zircons in sandstones can give a limit to the age of the sedimentary rock by noting the age of the youngest zircon. The age of the sandstone must be younger than the age of the youngest zircon. Incidentally, your wild conjecture would suggest that all ages would be the same in this sandstone, but the zircons are quite diagnostic of source regions in the area. Cheers Joe Meert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
That wasn't my dream, it was Cornell Universities lecture that said that Ar40Ar36 is 20,000 times greater than is Ar40Ar36 in the atmosphere It's not polite to make a claim like that without providing the reference in the message where you make the claim. Of course and as usual, you are wrong. At http://www.geo.cornell.edu/...6notes03/656%2003Lecture06.pdf we find: "Atmospheric argon has a constant 40Ar/36Ar ratio of 295.5 ... some samples can have "initial" 40Ar/36Ar ratios greatert than the atmospheric ratio; this can lead to too old an age if not properly accounted for {emphasis added - JRF} ... For example, mantle-derived basalts have been shown in some cases to have 40Ar/36Ar ratios in excess of 20,000. The 40Ar/36Ar ratio reflecs the production of 40Ar by decay of 40K within the mantle. Minerals crystallizing in the presence of this gas will trap some of this 40Ar, which will result in an anomolously old age upon analysis." The rest of the lecture is concerned with how this problem is detected and accounted for. So, some but not all basalts have a 40Ar/36Ar ratio that is 20000/295.5 = 67.7 times larger than the atmospheric ratio, not 20,00 times larger as you claimed, and more than two orders of magnitude less than you claimed. Your 20,000 times larger is a pipe dream that you made up, based on an incredible misreading of a plainly written paragraph.. The situation mentioned does not occur in all analyses and can be detected and corrected in the manners described in that paper and the literature. This is known because Ar-Ar dating results agree with so many other results that are not affected by high Ar40/Ar36 ratios. Until you have addressed the consistent results obtained by different dating methods, you have not done anything. We are taking contamination into account. We are not dating sediments, we are dating igneous rocks. If you don't understand this and understand why, you know nothing. You have no idea of the realities of how diffusion works, or how mass transport works, or the theories or the realities of how dating is done, or the real-world data that has been collected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 188 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
it is not strictly correct to say that sediments are not being dated directly Yes, I know. I was trying to avoid that complication, but you are correct. You didn't mention the SHRIMP results on xenotime, which I love because the mineral appears to be so aptly named ...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5611 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
The granites themselves are testifing, that the earth is in fact young, perhaps as young as 6,000 years, something about the helium loss rate from the granite crystals is so high that all the helium would have escaped if the earth was 1.5 billion years, etc...
P.S. Its like Snelling wood fossil that dated young by C-14 showing the wood fossil shouldn't have any C-14 (but it did) when the Argon dating method's said it was millions of years based off dating the basalt rocks, and what geologist determine the age of the sediment layers, above and below, etc... granite has too much helium to be as old as all your other dating methods indicate, in fact you have scientific proof, that the other dating methods are aging your rocks too old, but I'm sure this scientific proof won't stop you from continuing to date them old, interestingly zircons proves toe is not a viable theory, etc... Acts and Facts Magazine | The Institute for Creation Research [This message has been edited by whatever, 01-15-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2323 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Mods, is this thread ready for euthanasia? Mr. whatever certainly appears to be incapable of and uninterested in addressing the subject of the accuracy of radioisotope dating. Yes Jon, I agree. There seems to be two different threads going on here, one thread is Whatever talking to himself and the other thread is everyone else attempting to get Whatever to respond to what they are writing. Closing comments anyone? Before I administer the lethal dose? AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5700 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
Put me out of this misery, PLEASE?
Cheers Joe Meert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
johnfolton  Suspended Member (Idle past 5611 days) Posts: 2024 Joined: |
I tried explaining how the sediments erupted from the flood would of had high ages, because of Dual porosity, the high water solutes found in the super deep wells, the sediments, that erupted out of the earth, made all the sediments date old, because these sediments would of dated old before they erupted out of the earth, and how the waters would of been diffusing by dual porosity from these sediments into the rock layers they actually date, and because of earth ground, weak electric current, affecting the rate they age, like in mercury amalgam fillings, etc...
Its like telling my dentists that mercury amalgams diffuse into the body, because of the bodies weak eletrical current, but they assure me mercury amalgams are safe and will not, they repeat will not, diffuse into the body, even though they need to replace amalgam filling because they age, etc...and when you listen to the DNR say mercury amalgams are safe, I kind of feel for Joe Meert and JonF because I think they actually believe the rocks are old, but if the flood happened then the sediments would of dated old the moment they erupted out of the earth, We now have the zircons helium levels proving conclusively that the granites are young, proving the other dating methods flawed, etc... P.S. I have no problem if you want to ax this thread, etc... [This message has been edited by whatever, 01-16-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2323 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Closing it then, any questions can be sent to Moose
AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024