Repudiation of the Rb-87/Sr-86 Isochron Dating Method
What could the initial concentration of Strontium-87 (Sr-87) have been? There is more than ten times as much Sr-87 than could have been produced by rubidium-87 (87Rb) decay over five billion years.
The Isochron Method - what is it?
Gunter Faure says that fractional crystallization of magma and separation of crystals from the remaining liquid result in the formation of suites of comagmatic igneous rocks of differing chemical composition (and I say for the reasons I just gave above--and a few more!).{33} All the rock specimens taken from this magma suite, when tested for their concentrations of strontium (Sr) and rubidium (Rb) and plotted on a graph, will plot as points on a straight line in the x,y coordinates, where x is the ratio of 87Rb/Sr-86 and y is the ratio of Sr-87/Sr-86.
This straight line is called an "isochron" because each point represents the various parts of the rock that cooled essentially at the same time and therefore have the same age. Faure says that it must be assumed that all the diverse rocks that formed from the magma had the same initial strontium 87/86 ratios (which may or may not be true). This gets rid of the problem of fractional crystallization, and the age of the rock can be calculated.
It is assumed that the rock from which the samples were taken did not have a loss or gain of daughter and parent isotopes after crystallization. Noticeable deviations from the isochron are probably a reflection of outside contamination or loss of isotopes through one or another means.
The isochron dating method is popular with geochronologists because it is not necessary to know the initial concentrations of parent and daughter isotopes. The assumptions that are made are:
1. The rock was a closed system (no gain or loss over time)
2. The daughter isotope was isotopically homogeneous throughout the magma prior to crystallization.
3. The samples of rock represent the rock unit that was formed at the same time.
4. Decay rates have not changed with time. Some scientists have actually been able to change the decay rates by external influence. (During the period 1949 to 1972, changes in decay rates were produced by changes in pressure, temperature, chemical state, electric potential, stress of monomolecular layers, destabilization by neutrino sea, etc. [Dudley 1976, Dudley 1972].
Problems with isochron dating
Y.F. Zheng at the Geochemical Institute (University of Gottingen, Germany) made the following observations:
The Rb-Sr isochron method has been one of the most important approaches in isotopic geochronology. But some of the basic assumptions of the method are being questioned at the present time. As first developed the method assumed a system to have: (1) the same age; (2) the same initial Sr-87/Sr-86 ratio; and (3) acted as a closed system. Meanwhile, the goodness of fit of experimental data points in a plot of Sr-87/Sr-86 vs. 87Rb/Sr-86 served as a check of these assumptions. However, as the method was gradually applied to a large range of geological problems, it soon became apparent that a linear relationship between Sr-87/Sr-86 and 87Rb/Sr-86 ratios could sometimes yield an anomalous isochron which had no distinct geological meaning. A number of anomalous isochrons have been reported in the literature and various terms have been invented, such as apparent isochron, secondary isochron, inherited isochron, source isochron, erupted isochron, mixing line, and mixing isochron. Even a suite of samples, which do not have identical ages and initial Sr-87/Sr-86 ratios, can be fitted to isochrons, such as aerial isochrons. [Zheng]
On page 2 of his paper he wrote:
"Evidently the theoretical basis of the classical Rb-Sr isochron is being challenged and some limitations of its basic assumptions are being revealed....Some of what this paper contains is not new to isotopic geochronologists, but it is drawn together here for the first time and is placed in a context within unifying general models for Rb-Sr dating."
Changes in the initial concentrations of Rb and Sr are possible. Flow of hot water through the rock is one of several important means, as Zheng admits:
"In some cases, gain or loss of Rb and Sr from the rocks is so regular that a linear array can be produced on the conventional isochron diagram and a biased isochron results from the altered rocks to give spurious age and initial Sr-87/Sr-86 estimates," [Zheng, p. 13]
At the beginning of his paper, he wrote:
As it is impossible to distinguish a valid isochron from an apparent isochron in the light of Rb-Sr isotopic data alone, caution must be taken in explaining the Rb-Sr isochron age of any geological system.
He equally applies the problem to the uranium-lead (U-Pb) and the in vogue samarium-neodymium (Sm-Nd) isochron methods. He concludes his paper with:
"In conclusion, some of the basic assumptions of the conventional Rb-Sr isochron method have to be modified and an observed isochron does not certainly define a valid age information for a geological system, even if a goodness of fit of the experimental data points is obtained in plotting Sr-87/Sr-86 vs. 87Rb/Sr-86. This problem cannot be overlooked, especially in evaluating the numerical time scale. Similar questions can also arise in applying the Sm-Nd and U-Pb isochron methods."
Non-radioactive geochronometers
Henry Morris published a long list of geochronometers [Morris], regular, clock-like processes by which the age of the earth might be measured. These processes are unknown, ignored, or unjustifiably spurned by evolutionists simply because they provide ages too short to allow for evolution.
Salt Influx in the ocean
The common salt (NaCl) content of the oceans increases all the time. Every year rain, snow, and groundwater flow dissolves a certain amount of salt and transports it to the oceans by rivers and streams. If one assumes that about the same amount of salt is carried to the ocean each year, the time it would take to bring the oceans to their present saltiness if initially they had been fresh water would be about 62 million years [Austin]. This does not mean the earth is 62 million years old, but it does place an upper limit on the age of the oceans. Because sodium chloride is so soluble in water, it is easily dissolved out of the soil and rocks. There is no mechanism that returns salt to the land in quantities remotely comparable to the amount entering the oceans.
Evolutionists responding to this paper insist that sodium is absorbed into the sediments. Some of this does occur, but is it reasonable to assume that the huge quantities of sodium accumulated in the oceans for more than 4 billion years are removed in this way? Recycling of sodium on this scale would require ocean sediments to be subducted under the continents, melted and redistributed at or near the surface of the continents as basalts. Recycling of sodium by this means would imply that most continental crust would have to consist of basalt instead of granite.
Radiometric dating methods, as you have seen, are not so straight forward or cut and dried as geochronologists would like us (John Q. Public) to believe. There are other geochronometers (age clocks) that show the earth is very young. Henry Morris' book, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, lists 68 geochronometers showing the earth to be young, such as,
1. The amount of helium in the atmosphere is too little if the earth is 4.5 billion years old. The helium concentration in the atmosphere can be produced in less than 10,000 years, and not much escapes into space as evolutionists argue. Helium is produced by the decay of uranium, thorium, radium, radon, polonium-210, -214, and -218. Larry Vardiman, a nuclear physicist at the Institute for Creation Research, has written an excellent monograph, The Age of the Earth's Atmosphere. In it he explains why the earth cannot be 4.5 billion years old based on the low level of helium in the atmosphere.
2. The concentration of sodium salt in the oceans is far too low based on the measured annual input from rivers. Based on present rates of sodium input into the ocean and its concentration in the ocean, the earth can be only 62 million years old. Why isn't there more salt in the ocean if the earth is billions of years old?
3. The amount of dust in the solar system vs. the Poynting-Robertson Effect. This effect caused dust to fall into the sun or onto a planet. The smaller the dust particle, the greater the Poynting-Roberton effect will be, and the faster it will fall. The solar system is far too dusty to be so old as evolutionists claim. After 170 million years, dust particles one centimeter in radius and smaller would have been drawn into the sun out to a distance three times greater than from the sun to the earth, but there are still enormous numbers in this size range striking the earth's atmosphere daily.
4. The temperature of the earth is too high for a planet 4.5 billion years old. Based on known concentrations of radioactive material in the earth and the heat generated from their decay, which slows down the cooling process, the earth cannot be much more than 100 million years old. Dr. Harold Slusher, a geophysicist and professor of nuclear physics at the University of Texas at El Paso has written a very rigorous, mathematical study on this entitled Age of the Earth.
Of course, evolutionary geochronologists reject these things, because they show the earth to be young. A person's philosophical bias determines which are acceptable geochronometers. It has nothing to do with the reasonableness of the method.
Bibliography and Footnotes:
Aardsma, G. E., "Has the Speed of Light Decayed Recently?—Paper 1," Creation Research Society Quarterly, 25:36-40, 1988.
Arculus, Richard, "Uranium: supernova to super nuclear," found at Uranium Institute of London's web site: http://www.uilondon.org/cosmic1.htm and subsequent links. This article is based on a paper he presented at the Uranium Institute Mid-Term Meeting in Adelaide on 17 April 1996.
Austin, S. A., and Humphreys, D. R., "The Sea’s Missing Salt: a dilemma for evolutionists," in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Creationism, edited by R. E. Walsh and C. L. Brooks, pp. 17-33, (1990).
Burchfield, J. D., Lord Kelvin and the Age of the Earth, Science History Publications, New York, p. 110, (1975)
Butcher, H. R., 1987, "Thorium in G-dwarf Stars as a Chronometer for the Galaxy," Nature 328:127
Cowen, R., "Found: Primeval Galaxies," Science News, 149:120-127, Feb 24, (1996).
Dudley, H.C., "Phenomenological Causal Model of Nuclear Decay, Assuming Interaction with Neutrino Sea," Lettere Al Nuovo, Cimento, Vol. 5, No.3, p. 232, (9/16/72).
Dudley, H. C., The Morality of Nuclear Planning, Glassboro, pp. 52-57 (1976).
Faure, Gunter, Principles of Isotope Geology, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, (1986).
Gentry, R. V., "Differential Lead Retention in Zircons: Implications for Nuclear Waste Containment," Science 216:296-298, (1982).
Gentry, R. V., Creation’s Tiny Mystery, Earth Science Associates, Knoxville, (1992).
Humphreys, D. R., "Has the Speed of Light Decayed Recently?—Paper 2," Creation Research Society Quarterly, 25:40-45, (1988).
Morris, Henry M., The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, p. 478, (1984).
Pilkey, O.H., "Mathematical modeling of beach behavior," GSA Today, pp. 11-12, (May 1996).
Proceedings of the Second Lunar Science Conference, Vol. 2, pp. 1117, 1494, 1496, 1499, 1516, 1539, 1593, 1620, 1631 (1971).
Silk, Joseph, The Big Bang, Revised and Updated, W.H. Freeman and Company, New York p. 148, (1989).
Slusher, Harold, Gamwell, Thomas, The Age of the Earth, Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, (1978).
Snelling, Andrew, "U-Th-Pb dating: an example of false isochrons," in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, edited by R. E. Walsh, pp. 497-504, (1994).
Spitzer, Jr., Lyman, Searching Between the Stars, Yale University Press, New Haven, p. 17-19, (1982).
Tarbuck, E., F. Lutgens, The Earth: An Introduction to Physical Geology, 2nd ed., Merrill Publishing, pp. 55-57, (1987)
Whitcomb, J. C., DeYoung, D. B., The Moon: Its Creation, Form and Significance, BMH Books, Winona Lake, p. 100, (1978). The table data was taken from the following sources:
Woodmorappe, John, "Radiometric Geochronology Reappraised," Creation Research Society Quarterly, 16(2):102-148, (1979).
Woodmorappe, John, "Some Additional Comments Concerning Several Matters (Part I)," Creation Research Society Quarterly, 21(4):209, (1985).
Zheng, Y.F., "Influences of the nature of the initial Rb-Sr system on isochron validity," Chemical Geology (Isotope Geoscience Section), vol. 80, pp. 1-16, 1989.
32 , "Mantle Geochemistry: Probing the Source of the Earth's Crust," Science, 203:530, 1979.