Numerous Problems With ICR’s Rate Books

Introduction

ICR has spent much money (www.icr.org/rate) on its RATE project and produced two books. Volume one and two. The theory of accelerated decay has been strongly promoted in the book. If rocks started at zero age (creation week) and were then accelerated to 4.5 billion years old we would expect that rocks would only have that age range. Zero years old to 4.5 billion years old. Dates over 4.5 billion or negative/future dates below zero would be impossible. The fact is that a huge array of such dates exist and refute both evolutionary ages and the ICR theory. Answers In Genesis (https://answersingenesis.org/answers/research-journal/v10/) promotes this false view as does Creation Ministries International (http://creation.com/radiometric-dating-breakthroughs).

The ICR Accelerated Decay Model

Page	Subject	Author
3	Where did all the heat go?	Larry Vardiman
	What about life on earth during the accelerated decay?
8	Where did all the heat go?	Larry Vardiman
	What about life on earth during the accelerated decay?
	God's method of creating on days 1 and 2 of the creation week.
19	God's method of creating on days 1 and 2 of the creation week.	Larry Vardiman
43	God's method of creating on days 1 and 2 of the creation week.	Donald DeYoung
333	God's method of creating on days 1 and 2 of the creation week.	Russell Humphreys
334	God's method of creating on days 1 and 2 of the creation week.	Russell Humphreys
340	God's method of creating on days 1 and 2 of the creation week.	Russell Humphreys
341	God's method of creating on days 1 and 2 of the creation week.	Russell Humphreys
351	BIBLE. Deuteronomy 32:22	Russell Humphreys
352	BIBLE. Numbers 16:30-33	Russell Humphreys
	BIBLE. Amos 9:2
353	BIBLE. 2 Samuel 22:8-9	Russell Humphreys
	BIBLE. 2 Samuel 22:8-9
	BIBLE. Habakkuk 3:8-15
356	Why would God change decay rates?	Russell Humphreys

http://www.icr.org/i/pdf/research/rate-all.pdf

ICR proposes accelerated radioactive decay for ¹⁴Carbon in living organisms but not ¹⁴Carbon in diamonds. Some magic affected one 100% and the other 0 at the same time. The same would be true of coal and fossils containing ¹⁴Carbon.

Russell Humphreys proposes that energy produced from accelerated decay leaked into hyperspace. [Star Wars?] “In a technical paper, I presented Biblical and scientific evidence that (a) space is a physical material that we do not perceive, (b) this fabric of space, and objects within it, are thin in a 4th spatial direction we do not ordinarily perceive, and (c) the fabric is surrounded by a hyperspace of four spatial dimensions. End note 27 of the paper explained that light emitted by objects within the fabric ordinarily would be constrained to travel entirely within the fabric. The end note also proposed that under certain extraordinary conditions the Bible calls the opening of the heavens, some of the emitted light could leak directly into hyperspace. [Star Wars?] Here I point out that such leakage would include other types of electromagnetic radiation, particularly black-body (thermal) radiation. This would allow the interiors of hot objects to cool rapidly, proportionally to the 4th power of their absolute temperature, according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Cooler objects would lose their heat much less rapidly. This mechanism appears to be a good way to get rid of the excess heat generated by accelerated nuclear decay during several episodes in the Earth's history, and it explains the evidence that this accelerated cooling did occur. It also would be a good way to get rid of other heat generated in creationist geologic models, such as heat in batholiths and new ocean floors. Last, I will briefly discuss the possibility that the opening of the heavens also caused accelerated nuclear decay.

(http://www.creationicc.org/icc18_abstracts.php). John Woodmorappe, (Mythology of Modern dating Methods, 1999, ICR Publishers, pages 24-26) admits that rocks have been dated to well over 4.5 billion years old. What he does not realize is that this is forbidden by accelerated decay which gets to only 4.5 billion and goes no further. Negative or future ages also wipe out accelerated decay because they go in the wrong direction.

Here is a rebuttal to both of them: Periods.pdf

Radiometric Databases

Excel File	Category	Number of Dates
DB_Earth.xlsm	Over 4.6 Billion Years	12,918
DB_Galaxy.xlsm	Over 10 Billion Years	1,850
DB_Negative.xlsm	Negative Dates	2,566
DB_Solar_System.xlsm	Over 5 Billion Years	7,421
DB_Universe.xlsm	Over 13 Billion Years	1,234
DB_Woodmarappe.xlsm	All	15,486

Dating Method	Excel File	Number of Dates
Argon/Argon	DB_Methods.xlsm	776
Potassium/Argon	DB_Methods.xlsm	59
Lutetium/Hafnium	DB_Methods.xlsm	47
Osmium/Osmium	DB_Methods.xlsm	1,795
Lead/Lead	DB_Methods.xlsm	8,449
Rubidium/Strontium	DB_Methods.xlsm	380
Rhenium/Osmium	DB_Methods.xlsm	641
Samarium/Neodymium	DB_Methods.xlsm	93
Thorium/Lead	DB_Methods.xlsm	1,551
Uranium/Helium	DB_Methods.xlsm	7
Uranium 235	DB_Methods.xlsm	359
Uranium238	DB_Methods.xlsm	1,336

¹⁴Carbon in living organisms are affected 100%

“Were there radioactive atoms in the tissues of creatures aboard the ark? The main ones are ⁴⁰K and ¹⁴C. If creatures aboard the ark had the same percentages of those isotopes we have in our tissues today, and the acceleration applies to them as well as to everything else, they might not have survived.” ICR RATE book, Page 373. See also http://creation.com/c14-dinos.

¹⁴Carbon in diamonds are totally unaffected

“After two half-lives, a quarter is left; after three half-lives, only an eighth; after 10 half-lives, less than a thousandth is left. In fact, a lump of ¹⁴C as massive as the earth would have all decayed in less than a million years.”

http://creation.com/diamonds-a-creationists-best-friend. Sarfati claims that only one million years of decay would be needed to get rid of ¹⁴Carbon in diamonds. CMI and ICR then propose 4,500 million years of accelerated decay

[http://creation.com/radiometric-dating-and-old-ages-in-disarray] has happened and only one million is needed to get rid of ¹⁴Carbon in diamonds!

1. Russell Humphrey’s mathematics are way off.

ICR RATE book, Page 340. Russell Humphreys claims that decay rates must have been 750,000 times faster in the past. If we look at Riley’s article [Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1970, 34:713-725] we see that isotopic data can give calculated ages of 900 billion years old. This would mean that that decay rates must have been 150 million times faster in the past. If we put isotope ratio tables from journal articles into Microsoft Excel 2007 and use Isoplot [http://www.bgc.org/isoplot] we can get hundreds of dates over 100 billion years old.

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/geology.html

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/Dating.html

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/geology_column.html

Isoplot has five different Uranium/Lead dating formulas for Microsoft Excel.

²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb Age (Million Years) 1

A=Pb76(207Pb/206Pb)

²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U Age (Million Years) 2

A=Pb6U8(206Pb/238U)

²⁰⁷Pb/²³⁵U Age (Million Years) 3

A=Pb7U5(207Pb/235U)

²⁰⁸Pb/²³²Th Age (Million Years) 4

A=Pb8Th2(208Pb/232Th)

²³⁰Th/²³⁸U Age (Thousand Years) 5

A=Th230Age(230Th/20U, 234U/238U)

Category	Hyperlink
Argon/Argon	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Argon.xlsm
Lead/Lead	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Lead.xlsm
Lutetium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Lutetium.xlsm
Main_Index	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Main_Index.xlsm
Negative_Dates	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Negative_Dates.xlsm
Older_Than_Earth	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Earth.xlsm
Older_Than_Galaxy	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Galaxy.xlsm
Older_Than_Universe	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Universe.xlsm
Potasssium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Potasssium.xlsm
Rhenium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Rhenium.xlsm
Rubidium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Rubidium.xlsm
Samarium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Samarium.xlsm
Thorium_232	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Thorium_232.xlsm
Uranium_235	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Uranium_235.xlsm
Uranium_238	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Uranium_238.xlsm

2. The Earth was in darkness

"This plasma [600 Million Centigrade] persists for several hours on the First Day of creation week, during which time beta decay freely takes place under the bare-nucleus conditions of all of the atoms."

http://creation.com/billion-fold-acceleration-of-radioactivity-demonstrated-in-laboratory

The Bible says that on day one of the creation week the Earth was in darkness. At 600 million degrees Kelvin the Earth’s surface would not be in darkness. The Sun radiance is 20,090,000 Watts/Square meter. Its surface temperature is 5,772 Kelvin.

If Earth’s temperature were at 600 million degrees Kelvin on day one of the creation week it would be 103,950 times hotter than the surface of the Sun. Its radiance is would be 103,950 x 20,090,000 = 2 x 10¹² Watts/Square meter.

Such conditions would be impossible during Noah’s flood where accelerated radioactive decay is also advocated. Where there two different mechanisms [creation week/ Noah’s flood] to start and stop the acceleration? What were they other than ICR mysticism?

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/determination-decay-constants-half-lives-uranium/

3. Isotopic ratios

http://creation.com/radiometric-dating-breakthroughs

When physicist Dr Russell Humphreys was still at Sandia National Laboratories (he now works full-time for ICR), he and Dr John Baumgardner (still with Los Alamos National Laboratory) were both convinced that they knew the direction in which to look for a definitive answer to the puzzle of why radiometric dating consistently [RUBBISH!] gives ages of millions and billions of years.

http://creation.com/radiometric-dating-and-old-ages-in-disarray

(1) the initial isotope amounts are known, (2) the decay rate has remained constant at today’s rate, and (3) the sample has remained in a closed system for millions and billions of years. The RATE group concludes that there was about 4 Ga of accelerated decay [RUBBISH!] at creation and about 500 Ma [RUBBISH!] worth at the time of the Flood.

If we use the computer program Isoplot [http://www.bgc.org/isoplot] and calculate the ages of the isotopic ratios in geology magazine articles we see why not dates have been put beside them. Many dates are negative or older than the evolutionary age of the universe. That is logically impossible and cannot be reconciled with accelerated decay.

Another nonsense quote! If 6 days [Exodus 20:8-11] corresponds to 4,000 million years of accelerated 207Pb/235U decay as CMI says, how can 206Pb/238U ratios give an age of 6,000 million years? Was the creation week 50% longer [Nine days long] in other parts of the world? 208Pb/232Th ratios give ages of 70,000 million years. Was the creation week 1750% longer [105 days long] in other parts of the world? The RATE team’s theories do not work and are rubbish. How can radiometric decay be happening at three different ways the same time? 207Pb/235U = 100%, 206Pb/238U = 150% and 208Pb/232Th = 1750%

4. Lead 207/206 ratios giving a uniform date of 5 billion years old.

Lead/Lead

www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Lead/Lead.xlsm

Number	Essay Title	Adobe Acrobat File	Pages
1	Argon/Argon Dating	Argon_Argon.pdf	10
2	Future Radiometric Dating	Future_Dating.pdf	10
3	Impossible Radiometric Dates	Impossible.pdf	9
4	Concordia Isochron Dating	Isochron_Dating.pdf	12
5	Meteorite Dating	Meteorite_Dating.pdf	28
6	Modern Dating Methods	Modern_Dating.pdf	14
7	Negative Radiometric Dating	Negative_Dating.pdf	6
8	The Neodymium Samarium Method	Neodymium_Samarium.pdf	13
9	Rocks Older Than The Galaxy	Older_Than_Galaxies.pdf	12
10	Rocks Older Than The Solar System	Older_Than_Solar_System.pdf	9
11	Rocks Older Than The Earth	Older_Than_The_Earth.pdf	10
12	Rocks Older Than The Universe	Older_Than_Universe.pdf	6
13	The Osmium 187/186 Method	Osmium_Dating.pdf	13
14	The Potassium Argon Method	Potassium_Argon.pdf	4
15	The Rubidium Strontium Method	Rubidium_Strontium.pdf	33
16	The Rhenium/Osmium Method	Rhenium_Osmium.pdf	7
17	Rubidium/Strontium Dating	Tas_Walker.pdf	14
18	The Thorium Lead Method	Thorium_Lead_Dating.pdf	23
19	The Uranium 235 Method	Uranium_235_Dating.pdf	7
20	The Uranium 238 Method	Uranium_238_Dating.pdf	16
21	Very Old Rocks	Very_Old_Rocks.pdf	13
22	Radiometric Dating Versus The Bible	Radiometric_Dating.pdf	11
23	The Mythology Of Modern Dating	Dating_Mythology.pdf	15
24	Pauls Book	Pauls_Book.pdf	296
25	MAIN INDEX (Microsoft Excel)	Main_Index.xlsm
26	Use Isoplot Version 4.13 To Excel	isoplot.html
		Total Pages	296

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/Dating.html

5. Thorium/Lead Ratios giving ages over 10 billion years old

If we use the computer program Isoplot [http://www.bgc.org/isoplot] and calculate the ages of the isotopic ratios in geology magazine articles we see why not dates have been put beside them. Many dates are negative or older than the age of the universe. That is logically impossible. How can the rock have formed millions of years in the future? The dating methods contradict each other and give ages that disagree with the Geological Column and with accelerated decay.

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/geology.html

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/Dating.html

Thorium_232

www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Thorium_232.xlsm

1	Chemical Geology, Volume 200, 2003, Pages 71–87
2	Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 105, 1991, Pages 154
3	Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 134, 1995, Pages 169
4	Earth Planetary Science Letters, Volume 82, 1987, Pages 121–135
5	Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems, Volume 4, 2003, Page 1089
6	Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 57, 1993, Pages 4687
7	Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 71, 2007, Pages 1290–1311
8	Geological Society of London, Volume 229, 2004, Pages 139
9	Geosphere, Volume 6, 2010, Pages 663-690
10	Journal of Petrology, Volume 38, 1997, Pages 115
11	Journal of Petrology, Volume 38, 1997, Pages 124
12	Journal of Petrology, Volume 39, 1998, Pages 711
13	Journal of Petrology, Volume 40, 1999, Pages 1399
14	Journal of Petrology, Volume 45, 2004, Pages 556
15	Journal of Petrology, Volume 46, 2005, Pages 830
16	Journal of Petrology, Volume 48, 2007, Pages 667
17	Journal of Petrology, Volume 51, 2010, Pages 2005
18	Journal Petrology, Volume 34, 1993, Pages 125–172
19	Meteoritics & Planetary Science, Volume 39, 2004, Pages 2033
20	Nature Geoscience, Volume 4, 2011, Pages 883-887
21	Nature, Volume 485, 2012, Pages 627–630

6. Uranium/Lead Ratios giving ages between 5 billion to 57 billion years old

If we use the computer program Isoplot [http://www.bgc.org/isoplot] and calculate the ages of the isotopic ratios in geology magazine articles we see why not dates have been put beside them. Many dates are negative or older than the age of the universe. That is logically impossible. How can the rock have formed millions of years in the future? The dating methods contradict each other and give ages that disagree with the Geological Column and with accelerated decay.

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/geology.html

http://www.creationismonline.com/website/Dating.html

Uranium_235	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Uranium_235.xlsm
Uranium_238	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Uranium_238.xlsm

1	Canadian Journal of Earth Science, Volume 43, 2006, Pages 1419
2	Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 105, 1991, Pages 149
3	Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 113, 1992, Pages 107
4	Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 134, 1995, Pages 169-185
5	Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 37, 1977, Pages 1
6	Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 73, 1985, Pages 269
7	Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 57, 1993, Pages 4687-4702
8	Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 71, 2007, Pages 3656
9	Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 72, 2008, Pages 2067
10	Journal of Petrology, Volume 38, 1997, Pages 115
11	Journal of Petrology, Volume 39, 1998, Pages 711–748
12	Journal of Petrology, Volume 41, 2000, Pages 759
13	Journal of Petrology, Volume 42, 2001, Pages 731
14	Journal of Petrology, Volume 45, 2004, Pages 555
15	Journal of Petrology, Volume 46, 2005, Pages 829-858
16	Journal of Petrology, Volume 48, 2007, Pages 661
17	Journal of Petrology, Volume 51, 2010, Pages 2003-2045

7. Journal articles with negative dates or over 5 billion years old

Download Excel file: http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/AA_Search.xlsm

Download Excel file: http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/AA_Index.xlsm

Download Excel file: http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/AB_Index.xlsm

Download Excel file: http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/AC_Index.xlsm

Download Excel file: http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/AD_Index.xlsm

Negative Dates	http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Negative_Dates.xlsm
Older Than Earth	http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Earth.xlsm

8. Argon/Argon Ages

Argon/Argon

http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Argon/Argon.xlsm

Reference	Minimum Age	Maximum Age	Age Difference	Age
Number	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	Ratio
1	1,770	13,960	12,190	6.89
2	162	9,669	9,507	58.69
3	120	9,710	9,590	79.92
4	1,102	8,058	6,956	6.31
5	3,560	8,900	5,340	1.50
6	94	14,917	14,823	157.69
7	1,871	7,460	5,589	2.99
8	164	11,250	11,086	67.60
9	42	7,347	7,305	173.93
10	1,700	22,090	20,390	11.99
11	580	9,840	9,260	15.97
12	324	17,178	16,854	52.02
13	506	13,348	12,842	25.38
14	633	8,569	7,936	12.54
15	1,115	9,969	8,854	7.94
16	510	7,100	6,590	12.92
17	3,841	11,421	7,580	1.97
18	7,700	16,300	8,600	1.12
19	651	18,620	17,969	27.60

9. Rubidium/Strontium Ages

Rubidium

http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Rubidium.xlsm

Reference	Minimum Age	Maximum Age	Age Difference	Age
Number	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	Ratio
31	3,700	9,300	5,600	1.51
32	1,400	900,000	898,600	641.86
33	1,180	13,700	12,520	10.61
34	3,110	7,330	4,220	1.36
35	-3,440	15,500	18,940	5.51
36	79	23,312	23,233	294.09
38	5,445	12,716	7,271	1.34
88	267	20,000	19,733	73.91
89	-31,071	76,523	107,594	3.46
92	32	6,874	6,842	213.81
97	-15	201	216	14.40

10. Rhenium/Osmium Ages

Rhenium

http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Rhenium.xlsm

Reference	Minimum	Maximum	Difference	Reference	Minimum	Maximum	Difference
Number	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	Number	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years
37	100	15,600	15,500	77	-2,860	2,820	5,680
38	-1	11,000	11,001	78	-9,260	1,620	10,880
39	2,700	5,800	3,100	79	-111,000	1,500	112,500
40	2,655	6,300	3,645	80	-15,000,001	14,999,999	30,000,000
41	-59,500	25,900	85,400	81	-770	6,790	7,560
42	-30,000	40,000	70,000	82	-1	2,240	2,241
43	-3,700	38,190	41,890	83	-2,500	2,800	5,300
44	-9,260	3,200	12,460	86	600	34,600	34,000
45	-3,100	8,400	11,500	87	-32,000	34,000	66,000
46	-675	10,430	11,105	93	-1	4,000	4,001
47	-24,710	8,620	33,330	94	-27,744	3,094	30,838
48	150	15,410	15,260	95	-79,140	144,550	223,690
49	90	6,900	6,810	101	-3,830	10,620	14,450
50	-279,000	79,000	358,000	104	-3,830	10,620	14,450
51	2,780	8,380	5,600	105	-1	1,550	1,551
52	1,390	77,160	75,770	106	-4,300	9,100	13,400
53	-51,000	10,300	61,300	107	-1	4,500	4,501
54	-47,693	39,229	86,922	108	-10,800	9,700	20,500
55	-1	748	749	109	-14,258	6,994	21,252
56	1,980	7,850	5,870	110	-7,120	7,690	14,810
69	-8,620	3,220	11,840	111	30	52,250	52,220
70	-6,240	3,510	9,750	112	-8,600	40,000	48,600
72	-279,000	38,190	317,190	113	-11,800	27,500	39,300
73	-2,400	10,700	13,100	114	-4,040	8,520	12,560
74	-2,080	21,500	23,580	115	-1	1,640	1,641
75	-7,307	3,505	10,812	116	-11,275	3,426	14,701
76	-1	68,000	68,001

11. Other Very Long Age Dating Methods

Older Than Galaxy	http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Galaxy.xlsm
Older Than Universe	http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Universe.xlsm

Dating	Reference	Minimum Age	Maximum Age	Age Difference	Age
Method	Number	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	10⁶ Years	Ratio
K/Ar	20	4,700	10,400	5,700	1.21
K/Ar	21	5,300	13,000	7,700	1.45
K/Ar	22	4,460	9,500	5,040	1.13
K/Ar	23	4,200	7,400	3,200	0.76
Lu/Hf	27	-3,220	3,870	7,090	2.20
Lu/Hf	68	-8,800	-630	8,170	0.93
Lu/Hf	71	-1,649	8,590	10,239	6.21
Lu/Hf	86	-320	1,730	2,050	6.41
Lu/Hf	92	-12,340	19,870	32,210	2.61
Lu/Hf	101	-30	14,650	14,680	489.33
Lu/Hf	104	-9,270	14,650	23,920	2.58
Nd/Sm	38	-1	3,200	3,201	3,201.00
Nd/Sm	26	1,070	12,600	11,530	10.78
Nd/Sm	27	-800	9,730	10,530	13.16
Nd/Sm	86	-2,247	96,661	98,908	44.02
Nd/Sm	92	-22,420	8,100	30,520	1.36
Nd/Sm	96	-659	1,137	1,796	2.73
Nd/Sm	98	-2,192	2,013	4,205	1.92
Nd/Sm	101	820	5,910	5,090	6.21
Nd/Sm	104	490	5,910	5,420	11.06

12. Historic volcanic eruptions

If accelerated decay causes long ages we would expect modern volcanic eruptions [zero accelerated decay] would be dated at only hundreds of years old. If we look at calculated dates in the articles or calculate dates from isotope ratio tables we get dates millions or billions of years old. No accelerated decay could possibly be involved.

http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/History_01_To_24.xlsm

http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/History_25_To_50.xlsm

http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/History_51_To_75.xlsm

http://www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Historic_Eruptions.pdf

13. Andrew Snellings Long Ages

Snelling devotes 180 pages of the RATE book (Volume 1, pages 123-304) to show that radiometric dating is based on unprovable assumptions concerning the initial composition and later contamination. If this is true, how do you know 4.5 billion years of accelerated decay has happened? How do you know that initial composition and contamination caused the entire age? He devotes much time to discrediting it as wrong but must also accept it as accurate to get the 4.5 billion values. He acknowledges (Volume 1, pages 140-147) that diamonds have been dates at 5.7, 6 and 9.5 billion years old respectively and puts this down to contamination. That could just as easily apply to any other date. How does he differentiate between dates caused by accelerated decay and contamination? How can he tell if half the date is one and the other half is the other? E.g., a rock is dated a one billion years old. 500 million years could be from contamination and the other half from accelerated decay.

Category	Hyperlink
Argon/Argon	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Argon/Argon.xlsm
Lead/Lead	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Lead/Lead.xlsm
Lutetium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Lutetium.xlsm
Main Index	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Main_Index.xlsm
Negative Dates	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Negative_Dates.xlsm
Older Than Earth	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Earth.xlsm
Older Than Galaxy	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Galaxy.xlsm
Older Than Universe	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Older_Than_Universe.xlsm
Potassium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Potasssium.xlsm
Rhenium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Rhenium.xlsm
Rubidium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Rubidium.xlsm
Samarium	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Samarium.xlsm
Thorium_232	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Thorium_232.xlsm
Uranium_235	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Uranium_235.xlsm
Uranium_238	www.creationismonline.com/ICR/Uranium_238.xlsm

He has made lengthy efforts to demonstrate consistency of radiometric dating but has left out much which differs.

Andrew Snelling, Answers In Genesis Articles
Radiometric Dates | Answers Research Journal

Download	File Size	Pages	Title

K-Ar.pdf	392,071	26	Potassium/Argon Dating
Lt-Hf.pdf	235,385	16	Lutetium/Hafnium Dating
Meteorites-1.pdf	1,288,192	44	Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 1.
Meteorites-1.xlsm	64,203		Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 1.
Meteorites-2.pdf	541,319	58	Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 2.
Meteorites-2.xlsm	51,664		Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 2.
Meteorites-3.pdf	575,842	52	Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 3.
Meteorites-3.xlsm	74,758		Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 3.
Meteorites-4.pdf	16,525,004	44	Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 4.
Meteorites-4.xlsm	50,046		Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 4.
Meteorites-5.pdf	407,252	30	Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 4.
Meteorites-5.xlsm	48,268		Radioisotope Dating of Meteorites: 4.
Radiometric_ages.pdf	3,872,866	14	Radiometric Isotope Ages
Rhenium-187.pdf	231,329	18	Rhenium/Osmium Dating
Rubidium-87.pdf	758,167	12	Rubidium/Strontium Dating
Sm-Nd.pdf	253,896	18	Neodymium/Samarium Dating
U-235-Dating.pdf	422,264	38	Uranium-235 Dating
U-Pb-Dating_01.pdf	490,495	48	U-Pb Dating Methods, 1.
U-Pb-Dating_02.pdf	1,805,657	56	U-Pb Dating Methods, 2.
U-Pb-Dating_03.pdf	1,323,766	38	U-Pb Dating Methods, 3.

paul_nethercott@live.com.au

www.creationismonline.com