Joined: April 2006
|Quote (Scienthuse @ Oct. 01 2009,23:16)|
Don't forget to read the previous post I wrote to you. I won't fail to mention that you are rather arrogant. Why don't you shut down the rhetoric and just stick to the facts. Read this:
"Relative dating only
The 40Ar/39Ar method only measures relative dates. In order for an age to be calculated by the 40Ar/39Ar technique, the J parameter must determined by irradiating the unknown sample along with a sample of known age for a standard. Because this (primary) standard ultimately cannot be determined by 40Ar/39Ar, it must be first determined by another isotopic dating method. The method most commonly used to date the primary standard is the conventional K/Ar technique." Wikipedia
Do you see what this is saying? They have to have a another sample of "known age"--and they are going to use a traditional K-Ar as the standard. Well how do they know the age? They know there can be argon in the rocks when they form--but they don't know how much. But they use it as a standard for something that is supposed to remove assumption!!
"There's a problem with argon being in the lava guys--we aren't sure of the K-Ar. Lets use Ar-Ar--it's more accurate and removes assumption--but we have to use a K-Ar sample as a standard because we know the age."
Is anyone getting dizzy?
Why is it that the sum total of IDCers' interest in science manifests itself in strenuous attempts to throw doubt on the research and conclusions of science, and absolutely no interest is ever shown in performing any of their own research to support their own hypotheses (which as far as I've seen do not exist)? Rhetorical question.
"Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers
"You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"