The Isochron methods makes the assumption that at time zero, the ratio
between the measured isotopes is 0 (or, in other word, they are
homogeneously mixed throughout the magma). This ratio makes a horizontal
line across the chart and this is the reference point from which one
compares the slope of an isochron line. The problem is, no one was there to
see if the ratio between the isotopes was really zero (i.e. if they were
homogenous). Thus, this method is no better than any other method. One has
to assume a zero slope at time zero. But, no one knows for sure and they
cannot know for sure. The more I read of the mix of magma, the more I read
of it being non-homogenous in any way.
The original mix of measured isotopes may have been at slope 1 and the
current reading may be at slope 1.005. The actual time lapse would be the
difference between slope 1 and slope 1.005 (= 0.005) not between slope 0
and 1.005.
All radiometric methods depend upon assumptions which are falsified or
unknowable.
Allen
----- Original Message -----
From: Hofmann, Jim <jhofmann@Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>
To: 'Allen & Diane Roy ' <Dianeroy@peoplepc.com>; Hofmann, Jim
<jhofmann@Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 9:16 PM
Subject: RE: How is this for an Anti-Evolutionist's use of quotes?
> Why?
> JH
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Allen & Diane Roy
> To: Hofmann, Jim
> Sent: 5/3/00 9:09 PM
> Subject: Re: How is this for an Anti-Evolutionist's use of quotes?
>
> I've read this crap. Pure non-sense.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hofmann, Jim <jhofmann@Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>
> To: 'John M. Lynch ' <john.lynch@asu.edu>; 'Allen & Diane Roy '
> <Dianeroy@peoplepc.com>
> Cc: 'Evolution Reflector ' <evolution@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 7:40 PM
> Subject: RE: How is this for an Anti-Evolutionist's use of quotes?
>
>
> > On isochrons, see
> >
> > http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html
> >
> > (It's all in one color and one font.)
> > :)
> > Jim Hofmann
> >
> http://nsmserver2.fullerton.edu/departments/chemistry/evolution_creation
> /web
> > /
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John M. Lynch
> > To: Allen & Diane Roy
> > Cc: Evolution Reflector
> > Sent: 5/3/00 7:30 PM
> > Subject: Re: How is this for an Anti-Evolutionist's use of quotes?
> >
> > Allen & Diane Roy wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > Since, assumptions 3 and 5 are commonly false, then the whole
> concept
> > > is pseudoscience nonsense (to put it kindly). If you want to accept
> > > radiometric dating, go ahead. No amount of rationalization can make
> > > falsified assumptions valid. I prefer my logic to be sound.
> >
> > ... and you've managed to completely ignore the fact that deviations
> > from these assumptions can be detected (e.g. isochron analysis). If
> they
> > are 'commonly false,' we know when they are, and why.
> >
> > It's analogous to a test for, say, a biochemical disease. It works
> > _most_ of the time, and by use of controls etc we can detect when it
> > wont work.
> >
> > -jml
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 04 2000 - 01:11:08 EDT