Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1

Indeed, argon will not form chemical bonds within any mineral that I know of; however, it can be found as a contaminant depending on the space available and the time of formation of the mineral grain.For instance, pyroxene is, for some reason, a known bad actor in that it does accommodate argon in its crystal lattice. That is why I never trust K-Ar dates on pyroxene crystals, or high-pyroxene rocks such as basalt. However, as a last resort, I believe some researchers have used it in past, the absence of other techniques. It just carries a very large caveat.YECs, however, will gladly date pyroxene by K-Ar since it does provide erratic results. Not only does it accommodate argon, but it has a low [K], making measurement much more difficult.On the other hand, biotite does not seem to have this problem unless it has been somehow altered, or contains some inclusions of other minerals. This is probably due to the available space in the crystal lattice, but also possibly because pyroxene would crystallize earlier in the cooling of a magma and scavenge the argon, or before the argon could partition into a gas phase and escape.Keep in mind that this is an extremely simplified explanation from someone only peripherally associated with the process and only in decades past. In fact, there are now so many new and accurate radiometric techniques that you don't even hear as much about K-Ar any more; but it would still be very useful in high potassium rocks.

How do the noble gases get trapped in radioactive rock. Have you thought this out?

I have thought that out, yes. Argon atoms are born right there in the rock when potassium-40 atoms decay.

Already answered in previous post.Edited by Pressie, : Changed paragraphEdited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Clear as mud. But the Geiger counter seems to rule tree ring dating. How C14 is in the atmosphere and where it is seems to be deciding factors. Most trees don't grow new rings. They have them at once and they become distinct and spread with age.

They cause the formation of the crystals. The crystal are formed slowly. Nice dodge.Edited by OS, : No reason given.

Then let's make sure and use the ones that do for dating calibration.JB

You always keep track of the date when you pull something from a tree. The results don't always represent tree ring growth.Let me guess, you measure every ring as it expands too. It is interesting to me how paper seems to date better than corpses.

When your response is written such as to be decipherable, I'll respond. Until then, it's simply not possible to understand things like: It's not even clear if it's a statement or a question.Try harder.JB

Who is "they?" Goblins?Cooling of molten rock can cause the formation of crystals - and slowly, if the rock cools slowly down underground. Potassium-40 decays very slowly. If an atom of it decays after the crystal it is in has formed, the resultant argon atom can get trapped.Is there something unclear there?

Um, er, nope. Most trees form new rings each year. This is established by correlating rings with each other and other dating methods and with known historical events.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

To me it seems as if OS thinks that atoms just run around in crystals in whatever and whitchever random way they want to.

How interesting. How do the trees manage to know in advance how old they are going to get? Lot's of trees around these parts live to 800+ years. Seems like it might get a tad crowded in the saplings with all those rings waiting to spread.I've looked at a pretty fair number of logs and stumps over the years and haven't seen where the unused rings might be hiding in the smaller ones. Can you shed some light on this?

Back to the most pseudoscientific part then?

They don't, because the amount rings of the tree is meaningless to carbon-14 dating. You pretend to have studied this on a cell level. All rings of the tree tend to get bigger with age.