Granite disprov a 6000 year old Earth.

[David_M]

​

I learned of this early and haven't taken Radiometric Dating seriously since.

Shame you did not do just a bit more research and discover that AiG were being extremely dishonest (as were the people who did the "research").

Only an idiot (or a dishonest shill) would send such samples in for testing without proper preparation (Austin admitted the samples were only relatively pure) as that will always give a result older than the formation of the rock due to the ever present xenoliths and xenocysts and no honest scientist would send their samples to a lab that states up front that it's equipment cannot accurately date samples less than 2 million years old.

 

[David_M]

2: There have been numerous experiments to try to change those rates using temperatures (high & low), pressures, , especially with nuclear waste, etc. in excess of those occurring naturally on earth, all unsuccessful.
​

​

Not quite correct, it has been demonstrated that under certain very rare circumstances (e.g. the levels of pressure and heat encountered inside a star that results in complete ionization of the atom) that one specific form of beta decay (electron capture) can undergo a half-life variation of a few percent.

 

[RickG]

​

Not quite correct, it has been demonstrated that under certain very rare circumstances (e.g. the levels of pressure and heat encountered inside a star that results in complete ionization of the atom) that one specific form of beta decay (electron capture) can undergo a half-life variation of a few percent.

Yes, I have read a few papers on that, however, let's keep in mind that this is not what is encountered with rocks we find on earth, not to mention that a few percent, even under those extreme circumstances, is negligible with respect to overall results. And of course, not to be misconstrued with known oscillations with respect Earth's elliptical orbit (distance from the sun) and specific radionuclides such as 226Ra, 32Si and 36Cl (Semkow, 2009).