Radiometric dating uses the decay rates of
The 4-part dialog (essay review, response, and replies) is in Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, the peer-reviewed journal of ASA.
To supplement the multi-topic general articles above, the pages below focus on specific topics, Helium Diffusion Radiocarbon Decay Polonium Halos Excessive Heat Conferences Helium Diffusion in Zircons • To supplement an introductory paragraph and a brief semi-technical overview in the papers above (Assessing the Rate Project and a response from RATE and replies...), Randy Isaac wrote Helium Diffusion and Retention in Zircons to describe a Standard Model (used by scientists to gather clues about the thermal history of a zircon crystal) and two models proposed by RATE: a New Creation Model (used by RATE) and Uniformitarian Model (used by nobody, since ) • Helium Diffusion in Zircon: Flaws in a Young-Earth Argument, Part 1 and Part 2 by Gary Loechelt, and his associated technical paper Fenton Hill Revisited: The Retention of Helium in Zircons and the Case for Accelerated Nuclear Decay.
Therefore RATE must propose that almost all of this decay occurred during the one-year flood, because for some unknown reason the decay rate for some atoms (but not others) was extremely high (but only for a year, not before or after).
This amount of decay would produce an immense amount of heat quickly, in less than a year.
• In an 8-part series during May-June 2007, Randy Isaac (executive director of the American Scientific Affiliation) outlined principles of Integrity in Science regarding (if you read the blog entries chronologically from bottom to top) Scientific Methodology, Skepticism in Science, Fraud, Phases of Science, Removing Unconscious Bias, Nine Lives of Offbeat Ideas, and Age of the Earth; the final part explains why he in Assessing the RATE Project where he reviews RATE's book, Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, Volume 2.
His review (June 2007) was followed (in March 2008) by a response from RATE and replies by Randy Isaac & Kirk Bertsche.
For about a century, radioactive decay rates have been heralded as steady and stable processes that can be reliably used to help measure how old rocks are.
They helped underpin belief in vast ages and had largely gone unchallenged.
RATE acknowledges the occurrence of This decay occurs throughout the geological formations that, according to flood geology, were produced by the flood.The results are described by Larry Vardiman, a member of RATE: "The amount of heat produced by a decay rate of a million times faster than normal during the year of the Flood could potentially vaporize the earth’s oceans, melt the crust, and obliterate the surface of the earth. This would be a "super-catastrophic flood" producing results far beyond anything we actually observe in the geological record of the earth.In addition to this heat-producing radioactive decay, young-earth explanations for flood geology require other heat-producing processes — volcanic magma, limestone formation, meteor impacts, biological decay, plus more heat with any of the models (Vapor Canopy, Hydroplate, Comet, Runaway Subduction) proposed to answer the question, "Where did the Flood water come from, and where did it go?Brian Pitts RATE Conferences • RATE Project Disproves Ancient Earth (a report from 2005) by Brad Harrub • Review of a RATE Conference (in 2007) by Steven Smith Abundant Evidence: radiometric dating is not the only type of scientific support for an old earth; instead, scientists have multiple independent confirmations for their conclusions.
You can examine the evidence-and-logic for yourself in AGE OF THE EARTH — SCIENCE.
But certain decay rates apparently aren’t as stable as some would hope.