Dating IS iffy, different labs have given different dates... an example of such was in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, where fossils of apelike animals attracted special attention because their finders claimed they were linked to humans. First measurements of argon in the volcanic tuff in which the fossils were found showed an age of 1.75 million years. But later measurements at another qualified laboratory gave results a half million years younger. then the ages of other layers of tuff, above and below, were not consistent. Sometimes the upper layer had more argon than the one below it. But this is all wrong, geologically speaking—the upper layer had to be deposited after the lower and should have less argon.
You are very confused. At least put some effort into getting your claims coherent and the facts correct
You are referring to the KBS Tuff. It is a difficult-to-date formation comprised of grains from several sources. The original date was 2.6 million years, which excited Richard Leakey because a hominid fossil was found below (not in) the tuff; that would push Man's origin way back, a position he championed. But independent methods of dating (especially pig index fossils) showed that this was unlikely to be correct. So scientists investigated and eventually found a repeatable and verifiable method for separating the components of the tuff, dated them by multiple independent methods (some involving argon, some not) in different labs, and obtained consilient dates around 1.85 million years. All in all a triumph of the scientific method.
So if the results of radiometric dating are not consistent, then their is something wrong with the method and it cant be trusted.
99.999% of the results of radiometric dating are consistent with other results, both radiometric (based on different and independent isotope systems and methods) and non-radiometric. This is far better than, say, any medical test. Next time your doctor wants to carry out some test tell him/her no thanks; you require 100% consistency and no test provides that, therefore the test is useless.
You're just leaving subduction out of your little scenario.
Yup. Before he claims subduction is just made up, there's lots of evidence for subduction. I personally think seismic tomography is really cool. Here's a creoss-section image showint the subducting Tonga slab. I tmay not work unless you are signed in at Science Magazine: registration is free. From :
quote:Figure 2. East-west vertical cross section of a P wave velocity image from 0- to 700-km depth along the line AB (1220-km length) in Fig. 3A. Red and blue colors denote slow and fast velocities, respectively. Solid triangles denote active volcanoes. CLSC denotes the location of the Central Lau Spreading Center and ELSC denotes the location of the Eastern Lau Spreading Center. Earthquakes within a 40-km width from the cross section are shown as white circles. The velocity perturbation scale is shown at the bottom
quote:We used a tomography method (9) to determine the 3D P wave velocity structure in the Tonga-Fiji region (9, 10) (Figs. 2 and 3). To confirm that the major velocity features were adequately resolved by the inversion, we conducted checkerboard resolution tests (11) (Fig. 4). The checkerboard test with a grid spacing of 50 km indicates good resolution for the area in and around the subducting Tonga slab and along the main line of OBSs (Fig. 4, A and B). For the test with a grid spacing of 70 km, the resolution is good for all the areas discussed (Fig. 4, C and D). We also conducted a number of inversions and resolution tests by changing the grid spacing, the grid configuration, and the initial model (10). The results show that the velocity structure in the study area (Fig. 3) can be resolved with a resolution of 50 to 70 km. This resolution scale is better than the 100- to 200-km resolution obtained in previous studies (5).
Fact is you cannot ‘date’ a rock, they don’t have clocks (even though scientists claim so). Furthermore, radiometric ‘dating’ is not possible on metamorphic rock as it is ‘contaminated’, and these rocks are where the fossilized remains of earlier life are contained.
I know this is OT, but ...
Fact is, you can date a rock and rocks do contain clocks (in a manner of speaking), your untenable assertion and appalling ignorance * notwithstanding. Feel free to start a topic and try to defend your position.
-----------
*Your second sentence contains two or three major factual errors, depending on exactly how you count them. E.g., although fossils are found in metamorphic rock, the vast majority of them are found in sedimentary rock. Bet you can't figure out the other one or two.
There's only enough water in the air to raise sea level by about one inch: About 3100 cubic miles.
Dollars to donuts our friend is one of those like buz, who thinks that you can stuff arbitrarily large amounts of water into the atmosphere with no inconvenient side effects such as destroying all life.
Even the Institute for Creation Research gave up on that one a long time ago. In SENSITIVITY STUDIES ON VAPOR CANOPY TEMPERATURE PROFILES Vardiman and Bousselot concluded that if all factors were somehow magically optimized to maximize atmospheric water varpor content, perhaps as much as 2 meters worth of water could be held in the atmosphere without raising sea-level temperature and pressure to excessive levels.
™ Version 4.0 Beta
