Correlation Among Various Radiometric Ages

Neither was an answer to my response.That they do not work effectively in DATING ROCKS!They do have benefits, and I'm not doubting that in regards to the methods.But they are not capable of giving accurate results in dating rocks! And thats what is at issue here.The examples that the articles give fail to demonstrate how the methods are effective in dating rocks. Another prime example of begging the question, nothing more or less here.A definition is not an explanation. The articles successfully define the terms, then create a strawman of the purpose of the article against Radiometric dating. The purpose is not to provide evidence for YECS. The purpose is to state that the whole dating method insofar as it can be used to measure millions or billions of years is entirely useless and ineffective. Edited by JesusFighter, : No reason given.Edited by JesusFighter, : No reason given.Edited by JesusFighter, : No reason given.

we don't even need to! Thats the sad part. Its a waste of time or money to proceed with the argument any further than that its useless as an aging tool.

Correlation? Do you realize how ambiguous that claim is?

In order for Radiometric dating to be of any use, the following four criteria must be met:1. The decay constant and the abundance of K40 must be known accurately.2. There must have been no incorporation of Ar40 into the mineral at the time of crystallization or a leak of Ar40 from the mineral following crystallization.3. The system must have remained closed for both K40 and Ar40 since the time of crystallization.4. The relationship between the data obtained and a specific event must be known.Guess what....not here, not ever!

You don't give a single objective standard of proof so your question is irrelevant here.

They aren't effective in dating anything!They are effective in that we can measure a rock's mass, its volume, its colour, the minerals in it, their size and the way they are arranged. We can crush the rock and measure its chemical composition and the radioactive elements it contains. But we do not have an instrument that directly measures age.

Yes there are a few. Elephant hurl as far as I'm concerned though.

Do the words, elephant hurl mean anything to you?

Lets see.The elephant jumped through a really big hoop.Right, but how big was the hoop?It was really big!Thats about what your standard looks like here.So how do you apply your standard is the question. Examples, and specifics.Edited by JesusFighter, : No reason given.

Right.....there's no age measuring tool for rocks. Thanks for agreeing .

Dedronchronology doesn't do much better really.

Face it my friend....your "dating" methods really suck.....I don't know how else to put it really.They don't directly measure the ages of rocks.Edited by JesusFighter, : No reason given.

I base it on the fact that there are no direct measuring tools for dating anything at all. So spout out all of the "dating" methods that you want here.

Its a nice way of saying dog crap!

Okay fair enough.