Concordia Isochron Dating

Concordia Isochron Dating

By Paul Nethercott

May 2012

How reliable is radiometric dating? We are repeatedly told that it proves the Earth to be billions of years old. If radiometric dating is reliable than it should not contradict the evolutionary model. According to the Big Bang theory the age of the Universe is 10 to 15 billion years.¹ Standard evolutionist publications give the age of the universe as 13.75 Billion years. ^{2, 3}

Standard evolutionist geology views the Earth as being 4.5 billion years old. Here are some quotes from popular text: “The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years.” ⁴“The Solar System, formed between 4.53 and 4.58 billion years ago.”¹ “The age of 4.54 billion years found for the Solar System and Earth.”¹“A valid age for the Earth of 4.55 billion years.”^{5, 6}

Evolutionists give the age of the galaxy as “11 to 13 billion years for the age of the Milky Way Galaxy.” ^1,⁷ Let us remember this as we look at the following dating as given in secular science journals.

Age and Mineralogy of Supergene Uranium

Theses rocks from the Bohemian Massif, South East Germany ⁸ were dated in 2010 using the Uranium-Lead dating method. The table in the essay has three columns of isotopic ratios, ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U, ²⁰⁷Pb/²³⁵U and ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb. You will notice in Table 4 the original article ⁹ that there are dates besides the ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U and ²⁰⁷Pb/²³⁵U ratios but no dates beside the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios. The first two sets of ratios and dates agree with each other between 94 and 101 percent accuracy. If we use the computer program Isoplot ¹⁰and calculate the ages of the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios we see why not dates have been put beside them. In Table 1 we can see that many dates are negative. That is logically impossible. How can the rock have formed millions of years in the future?

Table 1

Sample	Pb-206/207	Sample	Pb-206/207
Name	Negative Ages	Name	Negative Ages
A30	-29	A06	-29
A35	-8	A10	-45
A04	-18	A11	-83
A07	-8	A12	-23
A10	-8	A13	-133
A11	-13	A17	-116
A18	-8	A19	-72
A19	-18	A21	-2
A20	-8	A26	-34
		A27	-13
		A29	-45
		A39	-8
		A40	3
		A41	-50

In Table 2 we can see that the 207Pb/206Pb dates are between 1,000 to 21,000 percent discordant when compared to the two Uranium-Lead dating methods. Here is just one of many times where geology journals use selective evidence to try and prove evolution. If the third column or ratios were dated and added to the essay you can see how silly it would look.

Table 2

Sample	Difference	Sample	Difference
Name	Percent	Name	Percent
A26	1,087	A01	1,006
A29	1,192	A16	1,073
A25	1,202	A32	1,891
A41	1,338	A31	2,067
A07	1,964	A30	3,070
A19	2,385	A29	3,539
A10	2,389	A33	10,452
A22	2,551	A36	16,112
A18	3,126
A30	3,129
A24	3,360
A09	3,612
A13	4,616
A05	4,881
A06	4,982
A11	5,350
A25	5,479
A08	5,628
A42	6,215
A04	6,551
A22	7,031
A43	10,253
A17	10,673
A21	15,256
A20	21,500

207Pb–206Pb and 40Ar–39Ar ages from SW Montana

These rocks from North America were dated in 2002 using both ¹¹ ⁴⁰Argon/³⁹Argon and Lead-Lead dating methods. Again the no dates beside the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios. If we add dates we soon see why. The first table in his article has dates ¹² using the ⁴⁰Ar–³⁹Ar dating method. The third table ¹³ has the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios.

Table 3

Sample	K-Ar Dating	K-Ar Dating	Pb Dating	Pb Dating
Name	Max Age	Min Age	Max Age	Min Age
RRCR2	1,818	1,695	4,471	1,895
RRSW1	1,806	1,740	5,011	4,032
HLM2	1,853	1,620	4,522	1,848
TRMR2	1,729	1,199	5,049	2,644

If we use the computer program Isoplotand calculate the ages of the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios we see why not dates have been put beside them. The Potassium-Argon and Lead-Lead dating methods are extremely discordant. The author’s use of data is very selective. Dates that agree are added and those that do not are omitted. This happens over and over in geology magazines. We can see from the table below that many dates are older than the evolutionist view of the age of Earth. How can such an absurdity be possible? How can the Earth be older than itself?

Table 4

Sample	Million	Age
Name	Years	Category
RRSW1	5,005	Older Than The Solar System
RRSW1	5,011	Older Than The Solar System
RRSW1	4,939	Older Than Earth
TRMR2	5,015	Older Than The Solar System
TRMR2	5,049	Older Than The Solar System

²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb Dates

Uranium-Thorium-Lead Dating

This dating ¹⁴ was done in 1999 on meteorite samples by the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Hiroshima University in Japan. Below we can see the isotopic ratios take from Table 2 in the original article.¹⁵Using the computer program Isoplotwe calculate the ages of the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios we see why not dates have been put beside them.

Table 5

Pb-207	Million	Age
Pb-206	Years	Category
0.889	5,071	Older Than Solar System
0.916	5,114	Older Than Solar System
0.876	5,051	Older Than Solar System
0.869	5,039	Older Than Solar System
0.922	5,123	Older Than Solar System
0.867	5,036	Older Than Solar System

5,051 to 5,123 million years old.

Diagram 1

According to the Iscohron [1, 2 and 3] diagrams in the article ¹⁶the meteorites are only supposed to be 200 million years old! This means that the dates are 4,800 million years in error. The ratio of the so called “true” age versus the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb age is 25 to 1. The author deliberately chose not to put the dates beside the isotopic ratios because they would show how utterly ridiculous the whole system is. According to the Iscohron diagram in the article, the maximum error level is only 83 million years. The error level is 4934 years if we compare it to the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb age. This means the error level is 59 times in error.

Pb–Pb Dating Of Chondrules

The meteorite samples ¹⁷ were dates in 2009 by scientists form the Geological Museum, University of Copenhagen and The University of Texas at Austin. If we use Isoplot and run some of the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios given in the article ¹⁸through Microsoft Excel we see that many of the ratios produce ages over 5 billion years old.

Below we can see a Concordia diagram taken from the article ¹⁹ that shows the age of the rocks to be 4,565 million years old. As you can see the diagram claims that the error margins is only 810,000 years! If we add the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios dates we can see that the diagram is out by 550 million years. That means the error margin given in the diagram is 677 times to short!

Diagram 2

Table 6

Sample	Age	Age
Number	Million Years	Category
C2-L1	5,194	Older Than Solar System
C2-L2	5,190	Older Than Solar System
C2-L3	5,089	Older Than Solar System
C2-L6	5,020	Older Than Solar System
C4	5,174	Older Than Solar System
C4-L6	5,013	Older Than Solar System
C4-L7	5,094	Older Than Solar System
C4-L8	5,051	Older Than Solar System
C7	5,091	Older Than Solar System
C7-L7	5,032	Older Than Solar System
C7-L8	5,021	Older Than Solar System
C12-10	5,050	Older Than Solar System
C12-L2	5,063	Older Than Solar System
C12-L3	5,206	Older Than Solar System
C12-L5	5,002	Older Than Solar System

5,002 to 5,206 million years old.

Pb–Pb Dating Constraints

This dating ²⁰ was done in 2007 on meteorite samples by the Washington State University, Department of Geology. We can see from table seven which data in my essay the data was obtained from in Audrey Bouvier’s essay.

Table 7

Her Essay	My Essay
Table 2, Page 1587	Table 8
Table 3, Page 1588	Table 9
Table 4, Page 1589	Table 10
Table 5, Page 1590	Table 11
Table 6, Page 1590	Table 12

One of the concordia diagrams ²¹ in the article gives the following data:

Chondrules: 4565.5 ± 1.2 Ma

Pyroxenes: 4564.3 ± 0.8 Ma

Phosphates: 4562.7 ± 0.7 Ma

We are told that the date of 4,565 million years old is only one million years in error at the maximum. If run some of the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios given in the article through Isoplot, we see that many of the ratios produce ages over 5 billion years old. The oldest is 5,379 million years. The error margin given in the article is 814 times in error.

Table 8

Sample	Age	Age
Name	Million Years	Category
Allende, Whole-rock-R0	5,334	Older Than Solar System
CV3, L0	5,325	Older Than Solar System
MNHN, L1	5,250	Older Than Solar System
MNHN, L2	5,258	Older Than Solar System
MNHN, L1	5,296	Older Than Solar System
MNHN, L2	5,029	Older Than Solar System
UCLA, L1	5,244	Older Than Solar System
UCLA, L1	5,244	Older Than Solar System
UCLA, L1	5,245	Older Than Solar System
UCLA, Olivine-R0	5,344	Older Than Solar System
UCLA, L0	5,336	Older Than Solar System
Murchison, Whole-rock-R0	5,333	Older Than Solar System
CM2, L0	5,321	Older Than Solar System
CM2, CAI-R0-Murch	5,238	Older Than Solar System
CM2, L0	5,267	Older Than Solar System
ENSL, Blanke	5,016	Older Than Solar System
Canyon-Diablo, Troilitef	5,379	Older Than Solar System

5,016 to 5,379 million years old.

Table 9

Pb-206/Pb-207	Age	Age
Ratio	Million Years	Category
0.86665	5,035	Older Than Solar System
0.84518	5,000	Older Than Solar System
0.86306	5,030	Older Than Solar System
0.84983	5,008	Older Than Solar System
0.96359	5,185	Older Than Solar System
0.98081	5,210	Older Than Solar System
0.91120	5,106	Older Than Solar System
1.09068	5,359	Older Than Solar System
0.87958	5,056	Older Than Solar System
0.96906	5,193	Older Than Solar System

5,000 to 5,359 million years old.

Table 10

Pb-206/Pb-207	Age	Age
Ratio	Million Years	Category
0.85705	5,020	Older Than Solar System
0.85871	5,022	Older Than Solar System
0.85888	5,023	Older Than Solar System
0.85681	5,019	Older Than Solar System

5,019 to 5,023 million years old.

Table 11

Pb-206/Pb-207	Age	Age
Ratio	Million Years	Category
0.90695	5,100	Older Than Solar System
0.86255	5,029	Older Than Solar System
0.85613	5,018	Older Than Solar System
0.86644	5,035	Older Than Solar System
0.92835	5,133	Older Than Solar System
0.91990	5,120	Older Than Solar System
0.92542	5,128	Older Than Solar System
0.90807	5,101	Older Than Solar System
0.90861	5,102	Older Than Solar System

5,018 to 5,133 million years old.

Table 12

Pb-206/Pb-207	Age	Age
Ratio	Million Years	Category
0.88990	5,073	Older Than Solar System
0.87125	5,043	Older Than Solar System
0.89581	5,082	Older Than Solar System
0.89269	5,077	Older Than Solar System
0.85401	5,015	Older Than Solar System
0.89561	5,082	Older Than Solar System
0.98433	5,215	Older Than Solar System
0.92618	5,129	Older Than Solar System
0.99857	5,235	Older Than Solar System
0.95025	5,166	Older Than Solar System
1.01559	5,259	Older Than Solar System

5,015 to 5,259 million years old.

U–Th–Pb Dating of Hydrothermal ore Deposits

This dating ²² was done in 2010 on rocks from eastern China. If we look at one of the tables ²³ in the original essay we see four columns of isotopic data ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb, ²⁰⁷Pb/²³⁵U, ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U and ²⁰⁸Pb/²³²Th. Three have dates beside them but here are no dates beside the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios. If we run the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios through Isoplot we soon see why there are no dates beside them. According to the Concordia diagrams in the essay ²⁴the rocks are supposed to be 137 million years old with an average age of 120 million years.

Table 13

Sample	Maximum	Minimum	Average
Name	Age	Age	Age
TLS01	2,508	272	943
TLS02	346	8	254
S38	1,682	-294	354
S38	2,508	-139	899
S39	440	-325	94

²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb dates.

Table 14

Sample	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Percentage	Age
Name	Age	Age	Age	Difference	Category
S38-1-a1	12,721	136	12,585	9,253%	Older Than Galaxy
S38-3-a1	7,663	136	7,527	5,534%	Older Than Solar System
S38-3-a2	11,457	44	11,413	25,938%	Older Than Galaxy
S38-3-a3	7,175	130	7,045	5,419%	Older Than Solar System

Some of the dates listed in the article ²³ are older than the age of the Solar System and Galaxy! The author offers an explanation: “Due to the very low Th contents in the calcite-hosted titanite, no meaningful 208Pb/232Th ages were obtained.” ²⁵

U–Th–Pb Dating of Yucca Mountain, Nevada

This dating was done ²⁶ in 2008 by the U.S. Geological Survey office in Denver, Colorado. You will notice in Table 1 the original article ²⁷ that there are no dates beside the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios. If we use the computer program Isoplot and calculate the ages of the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios we see why not dates have been put beside them.

Table 15

Sample	206-Pb/207-Pb	Age
Name	Million Years	Category
HD1939Pb1-Cc	5,474	Older Than Solar System
HD2055Pb6-Cc	5,632	Older Than Solar System
HD2055Pb7-Cc1	5,512	Older Than Solar System
HD2055Pb7-Cc2	5,523	Older Than Solar System
HD2055Pb10-Cc	5,587	Older Than Solar System
HD-2057-Pb1-Cc	7,864	Older Than Solar System
HD-2057-Pb2-Cc	6,577	Older Than Solar System
HD2059Pb4-Cc	7,474	Older Than Solar System
HD2062Pb2-Cc	5,528	Older Than Solar System
HD2062Pb3-Mn	5,450	Older Than Solar System
HD2065Pb4-Cc	7,202	Older Than Solar System
HD2074Pb1-Cc3	6,304	Older Than Solar System
HD2074Pb2-Cc1	7,569	Older Than Solar System
HD2074Pb2-Cc2	6,519	Older Than Solar System
HD2089APb2-Cc	6,973	Older Than Solar System
HD2089APb3-Mn	5,483	Older Than Solar System
HD2092Pb1-Cc	5,567	Older Than Solar System
HD2092Pb1-Mn	5,452	Older Than Solar System
HD2098Pb3-Cc	5,891	Older Than Solar System
HD2109Pb1-Cc	5,806	Older Than Solar System
HD2155Pb1-Cc	6,349	Older Than Solar System
HD2177Pb2-Cc	5,792	Older Than Solar System
HD2177Pb1-Mn	5,452	Older Than Solar System
HD2227Pb1-Cc	6,109	Older Than Solar System
HD2227Pb1-Mn	5,453	Older Than Solar System
HD2231Pb1-Cc	5,472	Older Than Solar System
HD2233Pb2-Ch1	7,933	Older Than Solar System
HD2233Pb2-Ch2	8,186	Older Than Solar System
HD2233Pb3-Ch	7,583	Older Than Solar System
HD2233Pb4-Ch	7,898	Older Than Solar System

5,450 to 8,186 million years old.

The dates are between 5,450 and 8,186 million years old. The average age is 6,320 million years old. Table 3 in the original article ²⁸ has dates older than the universe and extreme discordance with up to 2 million percent. The average discordance is 212,000 perecent!

40Ar/39Ar and U-Th-Pb Dating

This meteorite sample ²⁹ was dated in 1983 by Donald Bogard from the Johnson Space Center, Houston Texas. If we look in Table 5 in the original article we see that there are dates beside the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁸Pb ratios no dates beside the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios. If we run the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios through Isoplot we see that they uniformly differ with the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁸Pb dates given in the essay. The author’s choice to drop these dates and only have dates beside the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁸Pb ratios is just an arbitrary choice.

Table 16

Age	Age	Age
Pb-207/208	Pb-207/206	Category
4,560	5,370	Older Than Solar System
4,720	5,364	Older Than Solar System
4,560	5,364	Older Than Solar System
4,450	5,283	Older Than Solar System
4,700	5,371	Older Than Solar System
4,540	5,367	Older Than Solar System
4,410	5,082	Older Than Solar System
4,560	5,368	Older Than Solar System
4,700	5,367	Older Than Solar System
4,500	5,333	Older Than Solar System

Isotopic Lead Investigations

These meteorite samples were dated in 1975 by the Department of Geological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, California. ³¹ From Table 2 in the original article we can calculate the ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios and then we run them through Isoplot. The ages are consistently older than the age of the Solar System.

Table 17

Sample	Pb 206/207	Age
Name	Ages	Category
7-1	5,175	Older Than Solar System
7-2	5,300	Older Than Solar System
7-3	5,287	Older Than Solar System
7-4	5,346	Older Than Solar System
4-1	5,337	Older Than Solar System
W-2	5,342	Older Than Solar System
Allende-1	5,297	Older Than Solar System
Allende-2	5,326	Older Than Solar System
Allende	5,262	Older Than Solar System
9-1	5,324	Older Than Solar System
M-2	5,322	Older Than Solar System
9-3	5,339	Older Than Solar System
9-4	5,334	Older Than Solar System
ChL-1 (IC)	5,138	Older Than Solar System
ChL-1 (ID)	5,137	Older Than Solar System
Ch3 (IC)	5,220	Older Than Solar System
Ch3 (ID)	5,227	Older Than Solar System
ChD (IC)	5,103	Older Than Solar System
ChD (ID)	5,099	Older Than Solar System

More Extraordinary Examples

Below are dates calculated from Pb207/206 isotopic ratios listed in standard geology magazines. The majority of ratios give dates of 5 billion years old. The model age put forward is radically different.

Reference	Maximum	Minimum	Model Age
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 245 (2006) 743–761	4,976	4,894	0.300
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 240 (2005) 605– 620	5,049	4,743	1
Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta 72 (2008) 5799–5818	5,008	4,871	3
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 267 (2008) 236–246	5,002	4,852	4
Mineralogy And Petrology (1993) 47, Pages 103-126	4,990	4,985	5
Journal of Petrology, 2011, Volume 52, Number 6, Pages 1143-1183	4,977	4,966	7
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 165 (1999) 117–127	4,975	4,933	10
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 306 (2011) 86–97	6,214	4,924	10
Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta, 2008, Volume 72, Pages 2067 - 2089	8,126	282	10
Journal of Petrology, August 2007, Pages 1-29	5,090	5,018	10
Journal of Petrology, 2007, Volume 48, Number 12, Pages 2261-2287	4,987	4,952	16
Chemical Geology, Volume 93 (1991) Pages 231-243	4,964	4,909	20
Earth And Planetarv Science Letters, Volume 46 (1980) Pages 221-232	5,040	4,712	20
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 301 (2011) 469–478	6,194	970	20
Geochemistry And Geophysics Geosystems, 2006, Vol 7, Number 8, Pages 1-29	5,009	4,992	20
Journal Of Petrology, 2004, Volume 45, Number 3, Pages 555-607	4,994	4,919	20
Journal Of Petrology, 2011, Volume 52, Number 2, Pages 401-430	4,968	4,920	20
Gondwana Research 11 (2007) Page 382–395	5,072	5,054	30
Journal Of Petrology, 1998, Volume 39, Number 4, Pages 711-748	5,020	4,994	30
Journal Of Petrology, 2004, Volume 45, Number 5, Pages 1069–1088	4,986	4,911	30
Journal Of Petrology, April 11, 2012, Pages 1-32	4,971	4,881	30
Journal Of Petrology, September, 2006, Page 1 Of 35	5,021	4,945	30
Journal of Petrology, 2000, Volume 41, Number 7, Pages 951-966	5,316	5,010	50
Journal of Petrology, 2010, Volume 51, Number 5, Pages 993-1026	5,008	5,004	50
Precambrian Research, 1999, Volume 95, Pages 167 - 185	5,010	4,968	55
Journal Of Petrology, 1998, Volume 39 Number 11-12, Pages 1847–1864	5,019	4,807	60
Journal Of Petrology, 1999, Volume 40, Number 6, Pages 873–908	5,174	4,987	60
Journal Of Petrology, 2007, Volume 48, Number 4, Pages 661-692	5,024	5,020	60
Ore Geology Reviews 31 (2007) Pages 337–359	5,010	4,976	60

Reference	Maximum	Minimum	Model Age
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 134 (1995) 169-185	5,016	4,953	66
Earth And Planetary Science Letters, Volume 59 (1982) Pages 327-342	5,061	5,004	70
Journal Of Petrology, 1997, Volume 38, Number 1, Pages 115-132	4,949	4,888	72
Journal of Petrology, April 2008, Pages 1-28	5,053	4,980	85
Chemical Geology, Volume 211 (2004) Pages 87–109	5,053	4,980	100
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 34 (1977) 419-431	5,057	4,838	100
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 76 (1985) Pages 57-70	5,061	4,898	100
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 244 (2006) Page 251–269	5,150	5,040	100
Earth and Planetary. Science Letters, 94 (1989) Pages 78-96	5,163	5,014	100
Geological Society Of London, Special Publications, 2004, Vol 229, Pages 133-150.	6,489	4,930	100
Isotope Geoscience, 1 (1983) Pages 23-38	5,043	4,760	100
Journal Of Petrology, 1998, Volume 39, Number 7, Pages 1285-1306	5,076	4,533	100
Precambrian Research, 1988, Volume 38, Pages 147 - 164	5,074	4,940	120
Journal Of Petrology, 2005, Volume 46, Number 4, Pages 829-858	5,065	4,996	140
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1992, Volume 56, Pages 347-368	5,236	4,822	150
Contributions Mineral Petrology (1984) 85, Pages 376-390	5,066	4,987	155
Mereoritics And PIanetary Science, 2000, Volume 35, Pages 341 - 346	4,987	4,905	200
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Vol 62, Number 16, Pages 2823–2835, 1998	5,123	4,900	220
Uranium-Lead Zircon Ages, U.S. Geological Survey Report	4,982	4,024	250
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 183 (2000) 93-106	5,235	5,077	267
Chemical Geology, Volume 236 (2007) Pages 27–41	5,014	3,978	280
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 104 (1991) 1-15	5,145	4,947	300
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 94 (1989) Pages 239	5,016	668	316
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 94 (1989) Pages 236-244	5,016	668	320
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1142/pdf/OF08-1142_508.pdf	4,997	4,799	416
Mineralium Deposita (1999) 34, Pages 273-283	5,046	5,029	456
Journal Of Petrology, 1999, Volume 40, Number 9, Pages 1399-1424	5,007	4,988	471
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Vol 62, Number 21/22, Pages 3527–3540, 1998	5,000	3,924	500
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 61, Number 23, Pages 5005-5022, 1997	5,026	3,831	600
Chinese Journal Of Geochemistry, Volume 16, Number 1, 1997, Pages 80-85	5,237	5,065	700

Conclusion

Prominent evolutionist Brent Dalrymple states: “Several events in the formation of the Solar System can be dated with considerable precision.” ³³

Looking at some of the dating it is obvious that precision is much lacking. He then goes on: “Biblical chronologies are historically important, but their credibility began to erode in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when it became apparent to some that it would be more profitable to seek a realistic age for the Earth through observation of nature than through a literal interpretation of parables.” ³⁴

The Bible believer who accepts the creation account literally has no problem with such unreliable dating methods. Much of the data in Dalrymple’s book is selectively taken to suit and ignores data to the contrary.

References

1 http://web.archive.org/web/20051223072700/http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

The age of 10 to 15 billion years for the age of the Universe.

2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe

3 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1001.4744v1.pdf

Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations, Page 39, By N. Jarosik

4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

5 http://sp.lyellcollection.org/content/190/1/205

The age of the Earth, G. Brent Dalrymple

Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2001, Volume 190, Pages 205-221

6 The age of the earth, Gérard Manhes

Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 47, Issue 3, May 1980, Pages 370–382