What is the natural process of radioactive dating
Jim stated that “uranium is preferentially encased in these [zircon] crystals while lead is preferentially excluded” but did not fully explain the significance of this.It can be experimentally confirmed that molten Zircon rejects lead.My comment about the inclusion of uranium and exclusion of lead during the formation of zircon crystals was just a repeat of an assertion made by Dr Payne.Not being a chemist, a mineralogist or a metallurgist, I have no reason to dispute this claim and, hence, did not include any further discussion.However, the biblical scenario suggests magmas crystallized quickly, and anticipates non-equilibrium conditions, and this would affect the way lead would have been incorporated in the zircon crystals.Geologists now recognize that granites formed very rapidly, which is consistent with the biblical scenario.
I also note that the last sentence in the lead-in section identifies someone as “having used it [this technique] to obtain one of the earliest accurate estimates of the age of the Earth.” However, I would question how it is known that the age estimate is accurate.
Any age calculated is based on multiple unprovable assumptions to match the long-age worldview.
Kevin Rogers submitted a comment to that article (reproduced below, edited to focus on substantive issues), to which Dr Jim Mason replies.
Andrew Kulikovsky spoke on one occasion and John Hartnett spoke on 2 occasions. About half those who are on the committee are YECs and the others doubt the YEC position to various degrees.
Jim raised some interesting points but I don’t believe that he addressed the central points that Justin raised.
Where the bottom part intersects the Concordia curve is said to be the ‘age’ of the metamorphic event.