Meteorite Dating

Meteorite 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.

History Of The Acapulco Meteorite

This meteorite was dated in 1997 by scientists ⁸ from France and Germany. Some of the dates ⁹ are older than the Solar System. We shall soon see that this is quite common for dating these rocks.

Table 1

Maximum Age	11,421	Million Years
Minimum Age	3,481	Million Years
Average Age	4,964	Million Years
Age Difference	7,940	Million Years
Difference	328%	Percent
Standard Deviation	1,723	Million Years

Potassium Argon Dating of Iron Meteorites

This article summarised meteorite dating in 1967. ¹⁰ Even 40 years later things are no better. In the opening paragraph he states that the iron meteorite from Weekeroo Station is date at ten billion years old. He then continues: “The formation or solidification ages of iron meteorites have never been well determined.” ¹¹He then cites earlier dating which produced an age of seven billion years. ¹²The author concludes with the following remark: “The ages found by us are typical of the great ages found for most iron meteorites. From these, in conjunction with the Strontium: Rubidium data of Wasserburg et al. on silicate inclusions in this meteorite, we conclude that the potassium: argon dating technique as applied to iron meteorites gives unreliable results.” ¹³

Table 2

Meteorite	Age
Sample	Billion Years
Neutron Activation	10.0
Stoenner and Zahringer	7.0
Muller and Ziihringer's	6.3
Wasserburg, Burnett	4.7
K-1	8.5
K-2	9.3
B-1	6.5
G-1	10.4

Pb Isotopic age of the Allende Chondrules

The meteorite was dated in 2007 using the ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U dating method. ¹⁴Over ten dates older than the age of the evolutionist age of the Solar System were produced and one was older [Ten Billion years] than the age of the galaxy. ¹⁵

Table 3

Maximum Age	10,066	Million Years
Minimum Age	1,799	Million Years
Average Age	4,509	Million Years
Age Difference	8,267	Million Years
Percentage Difference	559%	Percent
Standard Deviation	1,640	Million Years

Rhenium-187-Osmium-187 in Iron Meteorites

Scientists from France used both ⁸⁷Sr/⁸⁶Sr and Rhenium-Osmium method were used to date this meteorite in 1998.¹⁶Dates in the essay ¹⁷ of the Canyon Diablo meteorite vary from one to fourteen billion years old. There is a 1,200% difference between the youngest and oldest date obtained for the one rock.

Table 4

Meteorite	Age
Name	Billion Years
Canyon Diablo
Troilite 4	1.13
Leach Acetone	5.73
Leach H,O	8.31
Troilite dissolved	10.43
Metal 1	13.7

Ar-39/Ar-40 Dating of Mesosiderites

This was dated in 1990 by Scientists from the NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas.¹⁸All of the eleven meteorites dated gave ages older than the Solar System and three dated as being as old, or even older than the evolutionist age of the galaxy.¹⁹According to one table the supposed true age is just 3.5 billion years old.²⁰

Table 5

Meteorite	Maximum	Minimum	Age Difference	Percentage
Name	Billion Years	Billion Years	Billion Years	Difference
1. Emery	9.08	3.31	5.77	274%
2. Estherville	13.96	3.18	10.78	438%
3. Hainholz	5.48	1.55	3.93	353%
4. Lowicz	9.93	2.92	7.01	340%
5. Morristown	7.92	3.60	4.32	220%
6. Mount Padbury	5.52	3.49	2.03	158%
7. Patwar Basalt	6.14	1.80	4.34	341%
8. Patwar Gabbro	8.43	2.67	5.76	315%
9. QUE-86900	10.92	3.24	7.68	337%
10. Simondium	9.17	3.27	5.90	280%
11. Veramin	13.13	2.71	10.42	484%

40Ar-39Ar Chronology

Dated in 2009 by scientists ²¹ from Germany and Russia, these meteorite samples gave astounding results. Many dates were older than the evolutionist age of the Solar System, older than the galaxy and older than the Big Bang. ²²Most age results were hundreds or thousands of percent discordant.

Table 6

Sample	Maximum	Minimum	Age Difference	Percent
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
Table A01. Dhofar 019 whole rock	11,679	737	10,942	1,584%
Table A02. Dhofar 019 maskelynite	10,521	818	9,703	1,286%
Table A03. Dhofar 019 pyroxene	10,730	804	9,926	1,334%
Table A04. Dhofar 019 olivine	10,487	1,778	8,709	589%
Table A05. Dhofar 019 opaque	14,917	4,420	10,497	337%
Table A06. SaU 005 whole rock	7,184	568	6,616	1,264%
Table A07. SaU 005 glass	6,235	3,247	2,988	192%
Table A08. SaU 005 maskelynite	7,432	1,344	6,088	552%
Table A10. SaU 005 olivine	13,979	3,839	10,140	364%
Table A11. Shergotty whole rock	8,542	1,112	7,430	768%
Table A15. Zagami whole rock	6,064	94	5,970	6,451%
Table A16. Zagami maskelynite	5,733	238	5,495	2,408%
Table A18. Zagami opaque	7,707	290	7,417	2,657%
Table A9. SaU 005 pyroxene	12,845	1,354	11,491	948%

Shocked Meteorites: Argon-40/Argon-39

Dated in 1997 by scientists ²³ from Germany and France, these meteorite samples gave astounding results also. Many dates were older than the age of the Solar System, older than the galaxy and older than the Big Bang. ²⁴Most age results that were hundreds or thousands of percent discordant.

Table 7

Sample	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Percent
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
A. Rose City (H5/S6) host rock	4,766	193	4,573	2,469
B. Rose City (H5/S6) melt	4,529	2,126	2,403	213
C. Rose City (H5/S6) host rock #1	3,876	231	3,645	1,678
D. Rose City (H5/S6) host rock #2	3,259	293	2,966	1,112
E. Travis County (H5/S4) whole rock	3,614	295	3,319	1,225
F. Yanzhuang (H6/S6) host rock	5,598	65	5,533	8,612
G. Yanzhuang (H6/S6) melt fragment	10,217	1,902	8,315	537
H. Yanzhuang (H6/S6) melt vein	7,016	1,314	5,702	534
I. Alfianello (L6/S5) whole rock	3,470	968	2,502	358
J. Bluff (L6/S6) host rock	13,348	506	12,842	2,638
K. Bluff (L6/S6) melt	3,773	554	3,219	681
L. Mbale (L5-6) whole rock	3,531	466	3,065	758
M. McKinney (L4/S4-5) whole rock	1,821	499	1,322	365
N. Ness County (L6/S6) host rock #I	5,052	987	4,065	512
O. Ness County (L6/S6) host rock #2	6,668	1,997	4,671	334
P. Paranaiba (L6/S6) host mk #I	3,332	453	2,879	736
Q. Paranaiba (L6/s6) host rock #2	5,593	3,110	2,483	180
R. Taiban (L5/S6) host rock	2,845	492	2,353	578
S. Taiban (L5/S6) melt	1,435	156	1,279	920
T. Walters (L6/S4) host rock	3,452	1,592	1,860	217
U. Walters (L6/S4) melt	4,074	2,026	2,048	201
V. Beeler (LU/S4) host rock #I	6,466	798	5,668	810
W. Beeler (LL6/S4) host rock #2	6,609	1,491	5,118	443
X. ALHA 8101 1 (eucrite) clast	3,818	375	3,443	1,018
Y. ALHA 8101 1 (eucrite) melt	2,827	244	2,583	1,159

Potassium-Argon age of Iron Meteorites

If we compare the dates below with the previous two tables [Tables 6 and 7] we see that dating done on meteorites has not improved in fifty years! The dates below [Table 8] were dating done in 1958 by scientists from Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York.²⁵These dates ²⁶ are just as stupid as the previous two tables. The choice of 4.5 billion years as an “absolute” value is purely and arbitrary choice.

Table 8

Meteorite	Age
K-Ar Dating	Billion Years
Mt. Ayliff	6.9
Arispe	6.8
H. H. Ninninger	6.9
Carbo	8.4
Canon Diablo I	8.5
Canon Diablo I	6.9
Canon Diablo I	6.6
Canon Diablo I	5.3
Canon Diablo II	13
Canon Diablo II	11
Canon Diablo II	10.5
Canon Diablo II	12
Toluca I	5.9
Toluca I	7.1
Toluca II	10
Toluca II	10.8
Toluca II	8.8

The Allende and Orgueil Chondrites

This rock was dated in 1976 by scientists from the United States Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado. ²⁷ Six were dated as being over ten billion years old. ²⁸ Two were dated as being as old as the Big Bang explosion. ²⁸Fifty three dates were over five billion years.²⁸Below [Tables 9 and 10] we can see the strong discordance between the ²⁰⁸Pb/²³²Th and ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U dating methods

Table 9

Pb-208/Th-232
Maximum Age	14.40	Billion Years
Minimum Age	4.81	Billion Years
Average Age	6.40	Billion Years
Age Difference	9.59	Billion Years
Difference	299.38%	Percent
Standard Deviation	3.37	Billion Years

Table 10

Pb-206/U-238
Maximum Age	9.86	Billion Years
Minimum Age	3.91	Billion Years
Average Age	6.02	Billion Years
Age Difference	5.95	Billion Years
Difference	252.17%	Percent
Standard Deviation	1.45	Billion Years

Precise U-Pb dating of Chondrites

This dating was done in 2005 by scientists from USA and Canada. ²⁹Five dates were over five billion years old. ³⁰

Table 11

Maximum Age	6,473	Million Years
Minimum Age	4,249	Million Years
Average Age	4,675	Million Years
Age Difference	2,224	Million Years
Difference	152%	Percent

U–Pb Ages of Angrites

This dating was done in 2007 by scientists from Australia and Canada.³¹Eight dates were older than the evolutionist age of the Solar System.³²

Table 12

Sample	Pb-206/U-238
Name	Million Years
Angra dos Reis
4W3	5,535
5W3	5,658
Lewis Cliff 86010
10W3a	6,072
11W3	6,625
D’Orbigny
15R	4,842
16Ra	4,893
17R	4,695
18R	4,972
19R	5,080
20R	4,957
21W3	5,471
22W3	5,291
23W3	5,568

Argon Diffusion Properties

Dating done in 1980 of various meteorites gave many discordant values.³²Six were dated as older than the Solar System. ³³

Table 13

Meteor's	Maximum	Minimum	Percentage
Name	Billion Years	Billion Years	Difference
Wellman	5.2	3.737	139%
Wickenburg	3.005	0.568	529%
Shaw	5.15	4.17	123%
Louisville	5.5	0.51	1,078%
Arapahoe	9.71	0.89	1,091%
Farmington	3.7	0.511	724%
Lubbock	9.4	0.12	7,833%
Orvinio	8.78	0.764	1,149%

U-Th-Pb Dating of Abee E4 Meteorite

This dating was done in 1982 by scientists from the NASA, Johnson Space Center, Houston Texas and the U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado.³⁵The two table below [Table 14, 15] are a summary of Argon dating done on different meteorite samples.³⁶Both sample record dates older than the evolutionist age of the solar system. The original article has undated ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios. If we run the through Isoplot ³⁷ we find the ratios ^{38, 39}give the results in tables 16 and 17. All are much older than the evolutionist age of the solar system.

Table 14

Abee clast 2, 2, 05
Maximum Age	7,200	Million Years
Minimum Age	3,990	Million Years
Average Age	4,640	Million Years
Age Difference	3,210	Million Years
Difference	180%	Percent
Standard Deviation	840	Million Years

Table 15

Abee clast 3, 3, 06
Maximum Age	8,900	Million Years
Minimum Age	3,580	Million Years
Average Age	4,610	Million Years
Age Difference	5,320	Million Years
Difference	248%	Percent
Standard Deviation	1,360	Million Years

Table 16

Meteorite	Pb-206/207	Pb-206/207
Name	Ratio	Age
Abee 1	1.0992	5,370
	1.0945	5,364
	1.0947	5,364
	1.0330	5,283

Abee 2	1.1000	5,371
	1.0966	5,367
	0.8958	5,082

Abee 3	1.0976	5,368
	1.0967	5,367
	1.0708	5,333

Table 17

Meteorite	Pb-207/206	Pb-207/206
Name	Ratio	Age
Abee 1	1.0993	5,370
	1.1005	5,372
	1.0994	5,370

Abee 2	1.1005	5,372
	1.0991	5,370

Abee 3	1.0999	5,371
	1.0993	5,370

Indarch	1.1005	5,372

St. Sauveur	0.7015	4,734

Canyon Diablo	1.1060	5,379

39Ar/40Ar Ages of Eucrites

These samples were dated in 2003 by scientists from the NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, and the Lockheed-Martin Corporation, Houston, Texas.⁴⁰Ten of the meteorites were dated as being over five billion years old. ⁴¹

Table 18

Meteorite	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Percent
Sample	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
A. QUE 97053,8	9,669	3,749	5,920	257%
B. GRA 98098,26 WR	7,008	3,239	3,769	216%
C. PCA - 82502,81	5,431	3,300	2,131	164%
D. PCA - 91007,26	4,460	1,560	2,900	285%
E. Caldera	4,493	2,819	1,674	159%
F. Asuka-881388,55	4,853	3,250	1,603	149%
G. Asuka-881467,42	4,465	202	4,263	2,210%
H. GRO - 95533,7	4,096	2,823	1,273	145%
I. QUE - 97014,5	4,553	2,947	1,606	154%
J. Moama	4,484	866	3,618	517%
K. EET - 87520	5,481	2,004	3,477	273%
L. Moore County	6,742	1,827	4,915	369%
M. Serra de Mage	6,100	499	5,601	1222%
N. EET -87548	3,674	1,738	1,936	211%
O. ALH -85001,32	4,754	3,097	1,657	153%
P. Piplia Kalan	4,284	162	4,122	2644%
Q. Sioux County	4,513	2,189	2,324	206%
R. Asuka-87272,49	3,652	342	3,310	1067%
S. Macibini Glass	5,788	2,621	3,167	220%
T. QUE - 94200,13	3,724	3,169	555	117%
U. EET - 87509,24	7,496	4,026	3,470	186%
V. EET - 87509,71	4,449	3,558	891	125%
W. EET -87509,74	4,645	873	3,772	532%
X. EET - 87531,21	4,176	3,301	875	126%
Y. EET - 87503,53	5,209	3,568	1,641	145%
Z. EET - 87503,23	5,324	2,294	3,030	232%

Argon-39/Argon-40 Ages

These samples were dated in 2003 by scientists from the NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, and the Lockheed-Martin Corporation, Houston, Texas.⁴²The Monahans chondrite and halite was dated in 2001 as being over eight billion years old.⁴³

Table 19

Maximum Age	8,058	Million Years
Minimum Age	3,899	Million Years
Average Age	4,474	Million Years
Age Difference	4,159	Million Years
Difference	206%	Percent

Rb-Sr Ages Of Iron Meteorites

These samples were dated in 1967 by the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.⁴⁴Even after 40 years of research and the massive improvement in laboratory equipment and computer technology, things today are just as bad as back then! Fourteen of the dates are five billion years or more. ⁴⁵

Table 20

Meteorite	Age
Rb-Sr Dating	Billion Years
Four Corners AM 1	8.4
	9.3
	9.1
	9.1
	8.5
	8.2
Four Corners AM 2-B1	5.0
	5.1
	4.8
Four Corners AM 2-B6	5.0
Four Corners H-1	5.0
Four Corners H-3	4.9
Four Corners N-1	5.2
Linwood H-B1	5.1
Odessa N1-8	4.9
	4.8
Toluca N-A3	5.0
	4.7
	4.9
	4.9
Colomera D6	5.1

40-Ar / 39-Ar Ages of Allende

Scientist from the Max-Planck-Institute, Heidelberg, Germany, dated these samples in 1980. ⁴⁶Seven samples were dated as being over five billion years old.⁴⁷

Table 21

Sample	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Percentage
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
Sample 01	4,455	2,452	2,003	181%
Sample 02	5,067	3,027	2,040	167%
Sample 03	4,919	4,092	827	120%
Sample 04	4,939	4,363	576	113%
Sample 05	4,691	2,248	2,443	208%
Sample 06	4,943	4,102	841	120%
Sample 07	4,835	4,166	669	116%
Sample 08	4,776	4,207	569	113%
Sample 09	5,004	3,682	1,322	135%
Sample 10	4,505	1,871	2,634	240%
Sample 11	4,707	3,631	1,076	129%
Sample 12	5,641	4,330	1,311	130%
Sample 13	4,549	4,396	153	103%
Sample 19	5,590	4,110	1,480	136%
Sample 20	5,812	4,367	1,445	133%
Sample 21	5,784	4,256	1,528	135%
Sample 23	7,460	3,967	3,493	188%

The Fossil LL6 Chondrite

These meteorite fragments were dated in 2010 by scientists from Australia, South Africa, England and Finland. ⁴⁸Some dates are over 4,000 percent discordant. ⁴⁹The oldest dates are as old as the evolutionist age of the galaxy.⁴⁹

Table 22

Sample	Maximum Age	Minimum Age	Age Difference	Percent
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
A	2,065	164	1,902	1,263%
B	2,849	924	1,925	308%
C	2,043	177	1,867	1,157%
D	7,119	174	6,945	4,082%
E	3,889	249	3,640	1,563%
F	11,250	5,475	5,775	205%

K/Ar Age Determinations of Iron Meteorites

This was dated in 1968 and produced ages between 1.5 and 7.4 billion years. ⁵⁰ Eight dates were older than the age of the Solar System. ⁵¹ Comparing dating forty years ago with the latest dating techniques shows no improvement.

Table 23

Meteorite	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Percentage
K-Ar Dating	Billion Years	Billion Years	Billion Years	Difference
Carthage 527	6.25	3.65	2.60	171.23%
Odessa 485	7.40	4.20	3.20	176.19%
Tombigbee River 602	6.35	4.85	1.50	130.93%

The Peace River Shocked M Chondrite

The meteorite was dated by scientists from the Physics Department, Sheffield University, United Kingdom. ⁵²The dates listed in the original article ⁵³ are much older than the evolutionist age of the solar system. This was done in 1988. If you compare table 23 and table 24 in my essay you will see that after 20 years of research the dating is just as bad as day one.

Table 24

Sample	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Percent
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
TABLE 1A	3,176	190	2,986	1672%
TABLE 1B	5,006	422	4,584	1186%
TABLE 2	6,130	950	5,180	645%
TABLE 4	2,515	500	2,015	503%
TABLE 5	7,100	510	6,590	1392%

Ar-39/Ar-40 Dating of IAB Iron Meteorites

In 1979 this dating was carried out by the Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley.⁵⁴

One of the meteorites was dated at almost ten billion years old. ⁵⁵

Table 25

Maximum Age	9,500	Million Years
Minimum Age	4,460	Million Years
Average Age	5,161	Million Years
Age Difference	5,040	Million Years
Difference	213%	Percent
Standard Deviation	1,753	Million Years

Antarctic LL-Chondrites

This sample as dated in 1990 by the Department of Earth Sciences, Faculty of Science, Kobe University, Japan.⁵⁶Some were dated as being older than the evolutionist age of the Solar System.⁵⁷

Table 26

Maximum Age	7,330	Million Years
Minimum Age	3,110	Million Years
Average Age	4,410	Million Years
Age Difference	4,220	Million Years
Difference	235%	Percent
Standard Deviation	950	Million Years

Single grain (U-Th)/He ages

This sample as dated in 2003 by the Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Berkeley.⁵⁸The dating of one rock produced dates that varied by over 300 percent.⁵⁹

Table 27

Maximum Age	4,909	Million Years
Minimum Age	1,452	Million Years
Average Age	4,091	Million Years
Age Difference	3,457	Million Years
Difference	338%	Percent

Resolution Reveals New Problems

A joint paper by scientist from Australia, USA, Denmark and France. ⁶⁰It discusses why there is discord between dating done on meteorite samples. Below is a list of the five major points discussed in the article. ⁶¹

Table 28

Potential problem	Level of awareness and suggested actions
1	1
Presence of non-radiogenic Pb of unknown isotopic composition.	Recognized by most of the community.
The most important and common problem of all.	Better methods for removal of non-radiogenic Pb are required.
2	2
Deviations from closed system evolution (loss of Pb, gain or loss of U).	Requires monitoring U–Pb concordance and studying distribution of U and radiogenic Pb.
Important and common.
3	3
Mis-identification of the processes that start or reset the isotopic clocks.	Requires studying distribution of U and radiogenic Pb, improving experimental reference
Important and common.	data set for element migration caused by diffusion, alteration and shock, and linking isotopic dating
	to the studies in mineralogy and petrology of meteorites.
4	4
Analytical problems (fractionation, instrument-specific etc.) and blank subtraction.	Problems are widely recognized. Ongoing analytical developments help to reduce them.
Important.
5	5
Fractionation of radiogenic Pb isotopes induced by leaching of alpha recoil tracks.	Recognized by some ‘‘terrestrial” geochronologists, less known to meteoriticists.
Potentially important.	Detailed experimental studies are required to understand the nature and extent of fractionation.

Fission-Track Ages Of Four Meteorites

Six different meteorites were dated in 1976 by scientists from the Enrico Fermi Institute and Department of Chemistry, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.⁶² The dates [Table 29] varied by almost one thousand percent! ⁶³ If we look at table 30 we can see the four methods used [Fission Track, Potassium-Argon, Uranium-Helium and Rubidium-Strontium] and the discordance between them.⁶³

Table 29

Sample	Maximum Age	Minimum Age	Age Difference	Percent
Name	Billion Years	Billion Years	Billion Years	Difference
Bondoc	1.30	0.14	1.16	929%
Mincy	3.93	1.50	2.43	262%
Nakhla	4.40	0.77	3.63	571%
Serra	2.70	0.54	2.16	500%
Washougal	4.60	4.00	0.60	115%
Allende	4.50	3.60	0.90	125%

Table 30

Meteorite	Fission Track	K-Ar	U-He	Rb-Sr
Name	Billion Years	Billion Years	Billion Years	Billion Years
Bondoc	0.14	1.30	0.60
Mincy	1.50	3.93
Nakhla	4.40	1.30	0.77	3.60
Serra	0.54	2.70
Washougal	4.60	4.00
Allende	4.50	4.40		3.60

Discordant Meteorite Ages

Many dates are highly discordant and give different ages for the one meteorite. Meteorite Dar al Gani was dated in 2004 by scientists from Italy and England.⁶⁴

Meteorite Dar al Gani ⁶⁵

Maximum Age	3,725	Million Years
Minimum Age	1,749	Million Years
Average Age	3,120	Million Years
Age Difference	1,976	Million Years
Difference	213%	Percent

Table 31

The Kirin Chondrite was dated in 1981 by scientists from the Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University. Canberra.⁶⁶

The Kirin Chondrite ⁶⁷

Maximum Age	4,310	Million Years
Minimum Age	520	Million Years
Average Age	3,160	Million Years
Age Difference	3,790	Million Years
Difference	828%	Percent

Table 32

The Acapulco Meteorite was dated in 2003 by scientists from the Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Berkeley. ⁶⁸

(U-Th)/He ages from Acapulco Meteorite ⁶⁹

Maximum Age	4,909	Million Years
Minimum Age	1,452	Million Years
Average Age	4,091	Million Years
Age Difference	3,457	Million Years
Difference	338%	Percent

Table 33

Kyoungwon Min admits that the dating of the Acapulco meteorite is extremely discordant: “Note that seven out of 12 corrected ages are older than the age of the solar system.” ⁷⁰The diagram above is taken from his work.⁷⁰

These whole rock nakhiltes were dated in 2004 by scientists from the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.⁷¹

40Ar-39Ar Studies of Whole Rock Nakhlites⁷²

Table	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Difference
Number	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Percent
Table 1	1,405	262	1,143	536%
Table 2	1,409	199	1,210	708%
Table 3	1,425	761	664	187%

Table 34

The Kirin Chondrite was dated in 1980 by scientists from the Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University. Canberra.⁷³

History Of The Kirin Chondrite ⁷⁴

Table	Maximum	Minimum	Difference	Difference
Number	Billion Years	Billion Years	Billion Years	Percent
Kirin-1	4.36	2.16	2.2	102%
Kirin-2	4.06	0.48	3.58	746%

Table 35

Uranium-Thorium-Lead Dating Of Shergotty Phosphates

This dating was done in 2000 by scientists from the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Hiroshima University, Japan and the Planetary Geosciences Institute, Department of Geological Sciences, University of Tennessee.⁷⁵According to isochron diagrams in the original article, the meteorite’s true age is 200 million years old. ⁷⁶If we take the list of ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios in this article ⁷⁷ and run them through Isoplot we get the dates as shown in table 36 below.

Table 36

Sample	Pb-207/206	Pb-207/206
Name	Ratio	Age
SHR04.1	0.889	5,071
SHRO5.1	0.916	5,114
SHR06.1	0.788	4,900
SHR13.1	0.876	5,051
SHRI5.1	0.833	4,979
SHR16.1	0.869	5,039
SHR19.1	0.821	4,959
SHR21.1	0.842	4,994
SHR26.1	0.922	5,123
SHR26.2	0.831	4,976
SHR27.1	0.867	5,036
SHR28.1	0.813	4,945
SHR29.1	0.827	4,969

Ion microprobe U-Th-Pb dating

This dating was done in 2000 by scientists from the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Hiroshima University, Japan.⁷⁸According to isochron diagrams in the original article, the meteorite’s true age is between 1200 and 1700 million years old. ⁷⁹If we take the list of ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios in this article ⁸⁰ and run them through Isoplot we get the dates as shown in table 37 below.

Table 37

Sample	Pb-207/206	Pb-207/206
Name	Ratio	Age
LAFA01.01	0.7907	4,905
LAFA03.01	0.3969	3,897
LAFA04.01	0.6561	4,637
LAFA04.02	0.6639	4,654
LAFA04.03	0.6898	4,710
LAFA05.01	0.7999	4,922
LAFA08.01	0.4505	4,087
LAFA09.01	0.7126	4,756
LAFA10.01	0.6506	4,625
Y-000593.1	0.9029	5,093
Y-000593.2	0.7225	4,776
Y-000593.3-1	1.0819	5,348
Y-000593.3-2	0.8453	5,000
Y-000593.4	0.7097	4,750
Y-000593.5	0.6311	4,581
Y-000749.1	0.7842	4,893
Y-000749.3	0.9092	5,103
Y-000749.4	0.7529	4,835
Y-000749.5-1	0.8569	5,019

The Chondritic Meteorite Orvinio

Scientists from Arizona, Massachusetts, New Mexico and Florida performed this dating in 2004.⁸¹Four of the meteorites dated to be older than the evolutionist age of the Solar System. ⁸²One date to be older than the Big Bang. ⁸²The discordance between dates varied from hundreds to thousands of percent in error.⁸²

Table 38

Table	Max Age	Min Age	Difference	Percentage
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
A1	17,178	570	16,608	2,914%
A2	3,660	324	3,336	1,030%
A3	3,720	703	3,017	429%
A4	7,800	904	6,896	763%
A5	7,100	922	6,178	670%
A6	8,500	526	7,974	1,516%

Martian Meteorite Chronology

This meteorite was dated in 2011 by scientists from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Physical and Life Sciences, Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, California and the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of New Mexico. ⁸³The article states that the meteorite’s true age is 3.6 billion years.⁸⁴If we take the list of ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios in this article ⁸⁵ and run them through Isoplot we get the dates as shown in table 39 below.

Table 39

Sample	Pb-207/206	Pb-207/206
Name	Ratio	Age
Plag(R)	0.751287431	4,832
Plag(L)	0.787456711	4,899
Px(R)	0.580150952	4,459
Px(L)	0.699212521	4,729
WR(R)	0.480536633	4,183
WR(L)	0.489632855	4,210
Ilm	0.498182294	4,236
Heated Sample
Plag(R)	0.773980154	4,875
Plag(L)	0.640266469	4,602
Plag-rej	0.61697479	4,548
Px(R)	0.655620155	4,636
Px(L)	0.623966942	4,565
Px-rej	0.565672185	4,422
WR(R)	0.500867867	4,244
WR(L)	0.515289324	4,286
Ilm	0.498417311	4,237
NBS-981	0.913501361	5,110
Faraday–Daly	0.913967671	5,111

³⁹Ar/⁴⁰Ar “ages” in Martian Shergottites

I downloaded this table from the official Meteoritics website. ⁸⁶Six of the meteorites were dated as being well over five billion years old. One was dated as being as old as the evolutionist age of the Milky Way Galaxy.⁸⁶

Table 40

Sample	Max Age	Min Age	Difference	Percentage
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years	Difference
Los Angeles Plag	4,569	183	4,387	2,404%
Los Angeles, WR	1,270	156	1,114	714%
Los Angeles Pyx	7,432	581	6,851	1,180%
NWA-3171 Plag	2,484	203	2,281	1,121%
NWA-3171 Glass	2,056	299	1,757	588%
NWA-2975 Plag	5,709	262	5,447	2,080%
Dhofar 019 Plag	10,150	453	9,697	2,140%
Dhofar 019 WR	7,791	614	7,177	1,170%
DaG476 Plag	3,378	432	2,946	681%
DAG 476 WR	5,889	980	4,909	501%
DaG476-Px-Dark	7,975	1,746	6,229	357%
DaG476-Px-Light	4,117	391	3,726	953%
NWA-1068 WR	2,524	61	2,463	4,043%
SAU-005 WR	3,988	-0.4619	3,988	863,490%
Y-980459 WR	1,784	583	1,201	206%

Argon Dating Of Chondrites

I downloaded this table from the official Meteoritics website. ⁸⁷Four of the meteorites were dated as being well over five billion years old. One was dated as being older than the evolutionist age of the Milky Way Galaxy.⁸⁷

Table 41

Meteorite	Maximum Age	Minimum Age	Difference	Percentage
Name	Billion Years	Billion Years	Billion Years	Difference
Caddo #5	12.55	4.22	8.33	197%
EET833,5	6.82	2.21	4.60	208%
Udei Station	4.52	1.43	3.09	216%
Campo del Cielo	7.71	3.40	4.31	127%
Kendall Co.	7.59	2.06	5.53	269%

Isotopic Lead Ages Of Meteorites

This dating was done in 1973 by scientist from Switzerland and California. ⁸⁸The dates ⁸⁹ below in table 42 give numerous values much older than the so called age of the Solar System.

Table 42

Meteorite	206Pb/238U	207Pb/235U	207Pb/206Pb
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years
Bruderheim-1	4126	4447	4647
Bruderheim-2	4542	4592	4628
Bruderheim-3	4959	4703	4605
			4,613
Richardton-1	8615	5602	4604
			4,638
Richardton-2	6834	5230	4633
			4,616
Pultusk	5334	4939	4657
			4,651

If we take the list of ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb ratios in this article ⁹⁰ and run them through Isoplot we get the dates as shown in table 39 below.

Table 43

Meteorite	206Pb/204Pb	207Pb/204Pb	207Pb/206Pb	207Pb/206Pb
Name	Amount	Amount	Ratio	Age
Allende-I	1,064	1,088	1.0226	5,269
Allende-II	1,012	1,078	1.0652	5,326
Murchison	977	1,056	1.0809	5,346
	985	1,062	1.0782	5,343
Mezo-Madaras	9,449	10,384	1.0990	5,370
	9,444	10,356	1.0966	5,367
Bruderheim-I	3,562	2,683	0.7532	4,836
Bruderheim-ll	3,023	2,327	0.7698	4,867
Bruderheim-III	3,275	2,469	0.7539	4,837
	3,733	2,741	0.7343	4,799
Richardton-I	2,155	1,794	0.8325	4,978
	2,187	1,796	0.8212	4,959
Richardton-ll	2,228	1,827	0.8200	4,957
	2,571	2,050	0.7974	4,917
Pultusk	2,045	1,732	0.8469	5,003
	2,180	1,820	0.8349	4,982

U-Pb and ²⁰⁷Pb-²⁰⁶Pb ages of Eucrites

This dating was done in 2005 by scientists from the Antarctic Meteorite Research Centre, Tokyo, Japan. ⁹¹Several dates ⁹²give ages much greater than the “absolute age” of 4.5 billion years for the age of the Solar System.

Table 44

Meteorite	Maximum	Minimum	Average
Name	Million Years	Million Years	Million Years
Yamato-75011	5,070	4,548	4,863
Yamato-792510	5,300	4,613	4,899
Asuka-881388	4,825	3,847	4,404
Asuka-881467	4,911	4,569	4,673
Padvalninkai	5,223	3,102	4,537

⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar Dating Of Desert Meteorites

Dated in 2005 by scientists ⁹³ from Germany and Russia, these meteorite samples gave astounding results. Many dates were older than the evolutionist age of the Solar System. ⁹⁴

Table 45

Sample Name	Million Years
Table A1. Dhofar 007 whole rock.	7,632
	6,033
	5,498

Table A2. Dhofar 007 plagioclase.	7,582
	7,011
	4,753
	4,741

Table A3. Dhofar 300 whole rock.	9,015
	8,485
	5,516
	5,137

Table A5. Dhofar 300 pyroxene	8,957
	6,064
	5,656
	4,998
	4,720

Table A5. Dhofar 300 plagioclase.	9,680
	5,793
	5,721
	5,395
	5,237
	5,035
	4,788

Northwest Africa 482

These meteorites were dated in 2002 by scientists from the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. ⁹⁵Many dates were older than the evolutionist age of the Solar System. ⁹⁶

Table 46

Bulk Sample	Million Years
	9,670
	8,560
	8,127
	6,256

Glass Sample	Million Years
	9,905
	7,388
	5,708

Conclusion

Brent Dalrymple states in his anti creationist book The Age of the Earth: “Several events in the formation of the Solar System can be dated with considerable precision.” ⁹⁷

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.” ⁹⁸

I his book he gives a table ⁹⁹ with radiometric dates of twenty meteorites. If you run the figures through Microsoft Excel, you will find that they are 98.7% in agreement. There is only a seven percent difference between the ratio of the smallest and oldest dates.

As we have seen in this essay, such a perfect fit is attained by selecting data and ignoring other data. A careful study of the latest research shows that such perfection is illusionary at best.

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

7 http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0506458v1.pdf

The age of the Galactic disk, By E. F. del Peloso and L. da Silva

Astronomy & Astrophysics, Manuscript no. 3307, February 2, 2008

8 Paul Pellas, History Of The Acapulco Meteorite, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1997, Volume 61, Number 16, pp. 3477 - 3501

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Pellas.pdf

9 Reference 8, Page 3500

10 L. Rancitelli, Potassium: Argon Dating of Iron Meteorites, Science, 1967, Volume 155,

Pages 999 - 1000

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteor_Rancitelli.pdf

11 Reference 10, Page 999

12 R. W. Stoenner and J. Zahringer, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1958, Volume 15, Page 40.

13 Reference 10, Page 1000

14 Yuri Amelin, Pb isotopic age of the Allende Chondrules, Meteoritics And Planetary Science, 2007, Volume 42, Numbers 7/8, Pages 1321 – 1335

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Amelin_C.pdf

15 Reference 14, Page 1524

16 J. L. Birck, Rhenium-187-Osmium-187 in iron meteorites, Meteoritics And Planetary Science, 1998, Volume 33, Pages 641 - 453

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Birck.pdf

17 Reference 16, Page 649

18 D. D. Bogard, Ar-39, Ar-40 Dating of Mesosiderites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1990, Volume 54, pages 2549 - 2564

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\BOGARD_A.pdf

19 Reference 18, Page 2563, 2564

20 Reference 18, Page 2551

21 Ekaterina V. Korochantseva, 40Ar-39Ar Chronology, Meteoritics And Planetary Science, 2009, Volume 44, Number 2, Pages 293 – 321

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Korochantseva.pdf

22 Reference 20, Pages 316 to 321

23 Joachim Kunz, Shocked meteorites: Argon-40-Argon-39, Meteoritics And Planetary Science, 1997, Volume 32, Pages 647 - 670

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Kunz.pdf

24 Reference 21, Pages 664 to 670

25 R. W. Stoenner, Potassium-argon age of iron meteorites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1958, Volume 15, Pages 40 – 50

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Stoenner.pdf

26 Reference 25, Pages 45 to 46

27 Mitsunobu Tatsumoto, The Allende and Orgueil Chondrites , Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1976, Volume 40, pages 617 - 634

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Tatsumoto.pdf

28 Reference 27, Page 627

29 Yuri Amelin, Precise U-Pb dating of Chondrites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 2005, Volume 69,

Number 2, pages 505 – 518

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Amelin_A.pdf

30 Reference 29, Page 509

31 Yuri Amelin, U–Pb ages of angrites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 2008, Volume 72, Pages 221 – 232

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Amelin_D.pdf

32 Reference 31, Page 225

33 D. D. Bogard, Ar Diffusion Properties, Meteorites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1980, Volume 44,

Pages 1667 - 1682

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\BOGARD_B.pdf

34 Reference 31, Pages 1670, 1671

35 D. D. Bogard, U-Th-Pb dating of Abee E4 Meteorite, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 1983, Volume 62,

Pages 132 – 146

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\BOGARD_C.pdf

36 Reference 35, Page 134, 135

37 http://www.bgc.org/isoplot_etc/isoplot.html

38 Reference 35, Page 139

39 Reference 35, Page 142

40 D. D. Bogard, 39Ar/40Ar Ages of Eucrites, Meteoritics And Planetary Science, 2003, Volume 38, Number 5,

Pages 669 – 710

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\BOGARD_E.pdf

41 Reference 39, Pages 699 to 710

42 D. D. Bogard, Argon-39/Argon-40 Ages, Meteoritics And Planetary Science, 2001, Volume 36, Pages 107 - 122

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\BOGARD_F.pdf

43 Reference 42, Pages 120-122

44 D. S. Burnett, Rb-Sr Ages Of Iron Meteorites, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 1967, Volume 2,

Pages 397 - 408

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Burnett.pdf

45 Reference 44, Pages 401, 402

46 Elmar K. Jessberger, 40-Ar/39-Ar Ages of Allende, Icarus, 1980, Volume 42, pages 380 - 405

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Jessberger.pdf

47 Reference 46, Pages 390 – 403

48 F. Jourdan, The Fossil LL6 Chondrite, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 2010, Volume 74, Pages 1734 – 1747

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_JOURDAN.pdf

49 Reference 48, Page 1738-1739

50 W. Kaiser, K/Ar Age Determinations of Iron Meteorites, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 1968, Volume 4, pages 84 - 88

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Kaiser.pdf

51 Reference 50, Page 86

52 P. McConville, The Peace River shocked M chondrite, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1988, Volume 52, Pages 2487 - 2499

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_MCCONVILL.pdf

53 Reference 52, Pages 2489, 2490, 2493, 2494

54 Sidney Niemeyer, Ar-39/Ar-40 dating of IAB iron meteorites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1979, Volume 43, Pages 1829 - 1840

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_NIEMEYER.pdf

55 Reference 54, Page 1834

56 Osamu Okano, Antarctic LL-chondrites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1990, Volume 54, Pages 3509 - 3523

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Okano.pdf

57 Reference 57, Page 3510

58 Kyoungwon Min, Single grain (U-Th)/He ages, Acapulco meteorite, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2003, Volume 209, pages 323 - 336

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Kyoungwon.pdf

59 Reference 57, Page

60 Yuri Amelin, Resolution Reveals New Problems, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 2009, Volume 73, Pages 5212 – 5223

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Amelin_B.pdf

61 Reference 60, Page 5215

62 Eugene A. Carver, Fission-track ages of four meteorites, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1976, Volume 40, Pages 467 - 477

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Carver.pdf

63 Reference 62, Page 475

64 Luigi Folco, Meteorite Dar al Gani 896, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 2004, Volume 68, Number 10,

Page 2383

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Folco.pdf

65 Reference 64, Page 2383

66 T. Mark Harrison, The Kirin Chondrite, Geochemica Et Cosmochemica Acta, 1981, Volume 45, Pages 2514

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_HARRISON.pdf

67 Reference 66, Page 2514

68 Kyoungwon Min, (U-Th)/He ages from Acapulco meteorite, Earth And Planetary Science Letters, 2003, Volume 209, Pages 328

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Min.pdf

69 Reference 66, page 328

70 Reference 66, page 332

71 Timothy D. Swindle, 40Ar-39Ar Studies of Whole Rock Nakhlites, Meteoritics And Planetary Science, 2004, Volume 39, Number 5, Pages 764 – 766

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_Swindle.pdf

72 Reference 66, page 764-766

73 Sungshan Wang, History Of The Kirin Chondrite, Earth And Planetary Science Letters, 1980, Volume 49, Pages 117 - 131

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Age_Earth\Meteorite_WANG.pdf

74 Reference 73, page 120

75 Uranium-Thorium-Lead Dating Of Shergotty Phosphates, Mereoritics And Planetary Science, 2000, Volume 35, Pages 341-346

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Meteorites\Pb-206-01.pdf

76 Reference 75, Page 343, 344

77 Reference 75, Page 342

78 Ion microprobe U-Th-Pb Dating, Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 2004, Volume 39, Number 12, Pages 2033–2041

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Meteorites\Pb-206-04.pdf

79 Reference 78, Page 2035, 2037

80 Reference 78, Page 2036

81 The Chondritic Meteorite Orvinio, Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 2004, Volume 39,

Number 9, Pages 1475–1493

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Meteorites\Pb-206-05.pdf

82 Reference 82, Page 1488 – 1493

83 Martian Meteorite Chronology, Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 2011, Volume 46, Number 1, Pages 35–52

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Meteorites\Pb-206-06.pdf

84 Reference 84, Page 41

85 Reference 84, Page 47

86 D. Bogard, ³⁹Ar-⁴⁰Ar “ages” and origin of excess ⁴⁰Ar in Martian shergottites

http://meteoritics.org/Online%20Supplements/MAPS1080_Electronic-Annex.doc

87 Meteoritics & Planetary Science, Volume 40, Issue 2, February 2005

http://meteoritics.org/Online%20Supplements/Ar-XeData_Bogard.xls

88 G. R. Tilton, Isotopic Lead Ages Of Meteorites, Earth And Planetary Science Letters, 1973, Volume 19 Pages 321-329

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Meteorites\Pb-206-14.pdf

89 Reference 89, Page 328

90 Reference 89, Page 323

91 U-Pb and ²⁰⁷Pb-²⁰⁶Pb ages of Eucrites, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2005, Volume 69, Number 24, Pages 5847–5861.

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Meteorites\To_Old_07.pdf

92 Reference 92, Pages 5852 – 5853

93 Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 2005, Volume 40, Number 9/10, Pages 433–1454

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Very_Old_Rocks\Very_Old_02.pdf

94 Reference 94, Pages 1452 – 1454

95 Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 2002, Volume 37, Pages 1797-1813

C:\Essays\Geo_Dating\Very_Old_Rocks\Very_Old_04.pdf

96 Reference 96, Page 1806

97 The Age Of The Earth, By G. Brent Dalrymple, 1991, Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, Page 10.

98 Reference 98, Page 23

99 Reference 98, Page 287

100 Reference 98, Page 342

www.creation.com