"Allen & Diane Roy" writes
>
> We can go on and on about what we think can or can not happen. Show me
> scientific evidence that D and Di are indiscriminately used in chemical
> reactions in magma so that the ratio D/Di is isotopically homogenous.
There is a wealth of evidence that shows that chemical and physical
processes do not distinguish between an element and its isotope.
This is simple physics.
If, however, you're really talking about mixing two sources with
different initial ratios, that's another story. But that's
also adequately addressed by the talk.origin FAQ (
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html) under the
section "Mixing of two sources".
<snip>
> I find it curious that the Talk.Origins article does not present any
> evidence to back up this assertion. Their strongest statement is "Suppose"
> D/Di is isotopically homogenous. Strange talk on such a vital point. It is
> not up to me to prove them wrong. They must show evidence that cannot be
> interpreted any other way. After all, it is their theory, not mine. If
> they cannot support this point, they have no right to claim it valid.
It is very strange that they would leave such a gaping hole in
an argument when they've taken such pains to cover all other
possible ways isochron dating could fail. Now, why would they
do that? Hmm... here's my list.
1. They're stupid.
2. They recognize the problem but hoped you won't
visit their webpage.
3. They're blinded by Satan to gaping holes in methodology.
4. You're slightly confused and the web-site doesn't address
your issue because its a non-issue.
I think the majority of us agree that 4 is the simplest, most
likely explanation.
BTW, you don't have to pick on the Talk.Origins site. Here's
another site that has the same "problem":
http://asa.calvin.edu/ASA/resources/Wiens.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 05 2000 - 15:55:16 EDT