Furthermore, as discussed in Funkhouser and Naughton , p. As further discussed in Dalrymple and Lanphere , p. In addition, excess argon is even less of a problem with Ar-Ar dating, where excess argon can often be distinguished from radiogenic argon and its effects eliminated McDougall and Harrison, , p.
Etna 2 samples , Mt. Lassen, and Sunset Crater samples as their apparent K-Ar dates!!
Austin and Swenson also contain the same erroneous data. In reality, the Hualalai basalt had 1. Because Austin's essay is older, we can probably assume that these copying errors originated with him. Rather than checking the accuracy and relevancy of Austin's quotations from Dalrymple , Snelling and Swenson simply uncritically parroted and perpetuated Austin's mistakes in their later web essays.
This is truly a case of the blind leading the blind!! Link to other Andrew Snelling Rebuttals. The hydration level of the basalt. There might also be a case for ' Argon inheritance '.
The rock that came out of the volcano isn't magically reformed into brand new material: A Reply to "Scientific" Creationism by G. Geological Survey Open file report Your exact question is on page These flawed studies cite examples of "anomalous" ages from specific lava floes:. Excess argon produced apparent ages ranging from million to 2. These authors cite a study by Funkhouser and Naughton on xenolithic inclusions in the flow from Hualalei Volcano on the Island of Hawaii.
Argon–argon dating
The flow is an unusual flow because it carries very abundant inclusions of rocks foreign to the lava. These inclusions, called xenoliths meaning foreign rocks , consist primarily of olivine, a pale-green, iron-magnesium silicate mineral. They come from deep within the mantle and were carried upward to the surface by the lava. In the field, they look like large raisins in a pudding, and even occur in beds piled one on top of the other, glued together by the lava.
The study by Funkhouser and Naughton was on the xenoliths, not on the lava. The xenoliths, which vary in composition and range in size from single mineral grains to rocks the size of basketballs, do indeed carry excess argon in large amounts.
K–Ar dating - Wikipedia
Funkhouser and Naughton were quite careful to point out that the apparent "ages" they measured were not geologically meaningful. Quite simply, xenoliths are one of the types of rocks that cannot be dated by K-Ar techniques. Funkhouser and Naughton were able to determine that the excess gas resides primarily in fluid bubbles in the minerals of the xenoliths, where it cannot escape upon reaching the surface.
Studies such as the one by Funkhouser and Naughton are done to determine which materials are suitable for dating and which are not, and to determine the cause of sometimes strange results. They are part of the continuing effort to learn. There have been two extensive K-Ar studies on historic lava flows Dalrymple, ; Krummenacher, that showed that excess argon is not a serious problem for dating lava flows. An exception is the lava from the Hualalei flow, which is so badly contaminated by the xenoliths that it is not possible to obtain a completely inclusion-free sample.
K-Ar dating is sometimes tricky, but if you understand what you are doing, the results are generally reliable. Geologists avoid dating glassy, polydeformed or very altered rocks with K-Ar, because these are known to sometimes be problematic. Here are the original claims behind the Ngauruhoe volcanic rocks from the Institute for Creation Research.
The rest is assumed to be atmospheric; the atmospheric 40Ar is subtracted from the total 40Ar: However for very young rocks like these it is a problem. If you redo the maths and calculate the ages with the ratio of Because it is not precise enough for young rocks. Definitely not a creation website:. One of the fundamental assumptions of K-Ar dating assumption 3, above is that after correcting for atmospheric argon, all 40 Ar in the sample is the result of the in situ decay of 40 K, an assumption which is not always valid.
My first post was deleted for not being referenced, but think about why K-Ar dating is not used for "young" rock. It's assumed there is not enough 40Ar in the sample to be measured. However enough 40Ar was found in recently formed samples of volcanic rock.
The excuse of the wrong test doesn't hold up. Also the "excess Argon" excuse does not hold up either. It's that the amount of Argon is not what they expected. K-Ar dating relies on very long half-lives, and hence should not be used for dating new rocks. Wikipedia says "the technique is most applicable for dating minerals and rocks more than , years old. For shorter timescales, it is likely that not enough Argon 40 will have had time to accumulate in order to be accurately measurable.
- dating and marriage traditions in germany.
- physics - Is K-Ar a reliable method for dating rock ages? - Skeptics Stack Exchange?
- dating your highschool sweetheart again.
- dating b.c.
- K–Ar dating;
- ?
- Argon–argon dating - Wikipedia?
As an aside, this article from the Creation Institute admits that K-Ar's effective range starts at about , years old. One out of every 10, Potassium atoms is radioactive Potassium K These each have 19 protons and 21 neutrons in their nucleus.
Navigation menu
If one of these protons is hit by a beta particle, it can be converted into a neutron. With 18 protons and 22 neutrons, the atom has become Argon Ar , an inert gas. For every K atoms that decay, 11 become Ar How is the Atomic Clock Set? When rocks are heated to the melting point, any Ar contained in them is released into the atmosphere.
When the rock recrystallizes it becomes impermeable to gasses again.
As the K in the rock decays into Ar, the gas is trapped in the rock.