Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9071 total)
69 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, kjsimons, nwr, Percy (Admin), Theodoric (6 members, 63 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Upcoming Birthdays: Percy
Post Volume: Total: 893,045 Year: 4,157/6,534 Month: 371/900 Week: 77/150 Day: 8/42 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The radiometric dating of basalts
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5055
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 7 of 10 (660112)
04-21-2012 4:06 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Minnemooseus
08-15-2009 9:19 PM


OK, this is an old topic. And I'm not a geologist.

My understanding of your OP is that it's basalt in continental plates that are unsuitable for dating because they are too old, which would cause concentrations of the elements you list to be too low.

OK, my understanding is that oceanic crusts are younger than continental crusts. Am I mistaken in this? Well, the Pacific plate is apparently older and is subtending under boundary plates, but the mid-Atlantic region is spreading, creating new crustal rock all the time. So why would that crust be too old to contain the concentrations of elements that you might expect?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-15-2009 9:19 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022