Home / a new dating site 2016 / Mt etna radiometric dating

Mt etna radiometric dating

And in 25 times out of 26 tests there is no excess argon or there is so little excess argon that it will make only a tiny error, if any, in the final date for rocks millions of years old. Thus Dalrymple’s data is not consistent with a young Earth whatsoever. Even that significant error is only 1.19 million years (and not the 1.60 million years that Snelling claimed). If the identical rock had been formed 50 million years ago, the K-Ar would give a "false" age of a little over 51 million years. In addition, excess argon is even less of a problem with Ar-Ar dating, where excess argon can often be distinguished from radiogenic argon and its effects eliminated (Mc Dougall and Harrison, 1999, p. , Snelling failed to properly quote the 'apparent K-Ar dates' from Table 2 in Dalrymple (1969, p. That is, Snelling mistakenly listed the concentrations of 40Ar (in 10 to the -12 moles/gram) for the Hualalai, Mt. Lassen, and Sunset Crater samples as their apparent K-Ar dates!!

Furthermore, as discussed in Funkhouser and Naughton (1968, p. 4603), once the xenoliths were removed, the remaining matrix provided an expected date of 'zero years' (also see: Fresh Lava Dated as 22 Million Years Old). As further discussed in Dalrymple and Lanphere (1969, p. 91-92), Dalrymple concludes that excess argon is rare in volcanic rocks. B., 1991, The Age of the Earth, Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, USA. This is truly a case of the blind leading the blind!! B., 1969, '40Ar/36Ar Analyses of Historic Lava Flows,' Earth Planet. Harrison, 1999, Geochronology and Thermochronology by the 40Ar/39Ar Method, Oxford University Press, New York.As part of his seminal work on excess argon, Dalrymple (1969) dated 26 historical lava flows with K-Ar to determine whether excess argon was present. Of the 26 lava flows that were sampled and analyzed, 18 of them gave expected results. Eight rocks yielded unrealistic dates, which were either too old because of the presence of excess 40Ar (5 of them) or too young (negative ages) because of the presence of excess 36Ar (3 of them). Indeed, if Dalrymple’s data is representative, 3 times out of 26 the K-Ar method will give a too young date (though by only an extremely trivial amount for a rock that is really millions of years old). The one case that would have produced a significant error, the Hualalai flow in Hawaii, was expected (see the previous essay). Naughton, 1968, 'Radiogenic Helium and Argon in Ultramafic Inclusions from Hawaii,' J. Lassen, California ('dated' at 130,000 years; erupted in 1915 AD), and a basalt from Sunset Crater, Arizona ('dated' at 210,000 and 220,000 years; erupted in 1064-1065 AD). 'Thus while Snelling implied that Dalrymple [1969] found severe problems with K-Ar dating when the truth is quite the opposite. Two-thirds of the time there is no excess argon at all.

386 comments

  1. Excess Argon" The "Archilles' Heel" of Potassium-Argon and Argon-Argon "Dating" of Volcanic Rocks

  2. Radiometric Dating. Did I miss something? When has anyone ever received an absolute conclusion from radiometric dating? Uranium, potassium argon, carbon - all of those methods produce approximate results at best.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*