Is the Lava Dome at Mount St. Helens Really 1 Million Years Old?
It also showed that radiometric dating is not necessarily accurate and that God gave animals and plants Mt. St. Helens and Catastrophism. 's Lava Dome, high atop Mount St. Helens, in Washington State, USA the Institute for Creation Research on a climb into the crater of Mount St. Helens to view The method used at Mount St. Helens is called potassium-argon dating. By what twisted logic then are we compelled to accept radiometric dating results . Dr. Austin submitted the sample for radiometric dating to an independent . Henke, K. "Young-Earth Creationist 'Dating' of a Mt. St. Helens Dacite: The Failure of.
These rocks were dated using the same method in the lab and were assigned an age of 1. How can the very top, volcanic rock be older than the very bottom layer basalt rock? Even evolutionists admit that those Indian artifacts are not 1. This is a real and common problem with radiometric dating techniques. Etna — erupted years ago, but rocks were dated 25 million years ago. Lava flows at Mt.
Ngaurhoe, New Zealand — erupted in, but rocks datedyrs old. Hualalai basalt, Hawaii erupted years ago, but rocks were dated 1.
How Old Is the Mount St. Helens Lava Dome?
Etna basalt, Sicily, erupted inbut rocks were datedtoyrs old. Helens erupted inbut rocks were dated up to 2. ALL of the samples taken from volcanic eruptions of known times and dates are carefully collected and sent to the labs. NEVER do they come back from the lab, with the note: Too young to measure. It is a definite pattern.
Not very scientifically consistent is it? This has been known for many decades. It is the prime reason many scientists have had doubts about radiometric dating all along. But recently, the RATE research team has conclusively demonstrated with independent lines of evidence that radioactive decay rates, widely used to bolster deep time, were dramatically accelerated in the past.
RATE found 3 indicators that strongly indicate decay rates changed in the past, all pointing to a young age for the rocks and the earth. This He is released into the crystal and rock. Helium atoms are pretty thin and can seep through solid rock. But even for He, this takes some time. The speed of Helium diffusion through solid rock has been measured. If long -age evolutionary guesses of the original amount of U are correct, then we can calculate how much Helium should have been produced and then seeped out of the crystal.
If the granite is billions of years old, only the most recent Helium would still be trying to work its way out of the rock. So there would be very little Helium left in the rock.
BUT, if the rock is only thousands of years old not billionsthere should still be plenty of He still trapped in the solid granite rock. What do we actually find? What does the data basis of true science show?
There is enough Helium left in the rocks, to account for an age for Earth of only you guessed it! The standard age of the rock is said to be 1.
How Old Is the Mount St. Helens Lava Dome?
Plenty of time for the process to reach steady state by uniformitarian standards. All this time as Helium a very light element is given off, it slips around the other atoms and leaves the crystal lattice.
The hotter the crystal, the faster the He escapes into the surrounding rock. As the Zircon crystals were studied, it was apparent there was a lot of He still in the crystal — in fact much too much — if this was going on for a billion years. Measurements in a blind experiment were taken that showed how much Helium should be left after certain amounts of time, at various heat levels of the rock and the diffusion rate of He leaving the crystal.
Predictions were made for the diffusion rates based on two different relationships — one for an evolutionary time frame of billions of years, and one for a Creationist time frame of thousands of years. The results from an independent lab showed the diffusion rate to be practically the same as the predicted creationist rate.
Extremely close — excellent results for the young-earth creationist time frame, and not at all what the evolutionary time frame predicted. This is proof that those deep earth rocks with large amounts helium still in the zircon crystals were only thousands of years old.
They cannot be a billion years old, or close to that figure. If you believe in predictive, quantifiable science, then you cannot believe in 1.
In order to get the level of helium found in the rocks, there had to have been a lot of radioactive decay. But the results show also that there was not only very a rapid decay episode, but the helium still in the crystal, shows it happened in the recent past.
Recent as in thousands of years ago, not millions let alone billions. Samples came from several granites. Halos are a microscopic spherical pattern of damage in the crystalline structure of the granite. To evaluate hypothesis 3, we should look at the crystallization order of the phenocrysts as suggested by Bowen's Reaction Series. The series states that certain minerals will crystallize in a melt at higher temperatures than other minerals.
That is, different minerals have different freezing points. Mafic magnesium and iron-rich volcanic rocks, such as basalts, form from relatively hot melts C and hotter, Hall,p. Felsic silica-rich rocks, such as granites, form at cooler temperatures perhaps as cool as CHall,p.
The most common minerals in rocks of intermediate chemistry, such as dacites, are located towards the middle of the series.
Drive on to prove creation with science - Technology & science - Science - Evolution | NBC News
Bowen's Reaction Series is a very important concept that undergraduate students learn in their introductory physical geology courses. To be exact, Bowen's Reaction Series was the one diagram that I was required to memorize when I took my first geology course in college. Although Bowen's Reaction Series was established long ago by field and laboratory studies, Swenson, Austin and other YECs repeatedly fail to comprehend its importance and how it can produce ancient phenocrysts, which may affect the radiometric dating of very young samples.
In a young volcanic rock, such as the Mt. Helen's dacite, the calcium-rich plagioclases may have formed thousands or even a few million years ago. Again, as a rock ages and 40Ar accumulates in both the glass and any 40K-bearing minerals, the differences in the ages of the materials becomes less significant.
That is, if the glass quenched in an eruptionyears after the formation of the calcium-rich plagioclases, after Bowen's Reaction Series also predicts that pyroxenes will crystallize at higher temperatures before amphiboles.
Assuming that any argon contamination from Geochron's equipment hypothesis 2 is negligible, we see that the dates in Austin's table are consistent with the crystallization order in Bowen's Reaction Series. As expected, the purest pyroxene fraction provides an older date 2.
That is, IF the dates are real, the pyroxenes formed in the melt before the amphiboles as predicted by the series. Because the pyroxenes solidify before most other minerals, it's also not surprising that the 'pyroxene, etc. Depending upon the amount of zoned feldspars which consist of older calcium-rich cores and younger sodium-rich rims and the quantity of glass, amphibole and pyroxene impurities, the 'feldspar etc.
On the basis of the following statements by Swenson, his gross misinterpretations of Dalrympleand his unwillingness to respond to my earlier statements on Bowen's Reaction Series and its possible relevance to Austin's results, it is clear that Swenson does not know what Bowen's Reaction Series is and how it can affect the age distributions of minerals in very young volcanic rocks: They said that Dr Austin should have known they were old because the crystals were large and zoned.
However, Dr Austin's results Table 1 show that the wrong ages were not confined to one particular mineral. The idea that the age of a mineral can be anticipated by its size or colour is incorrect. Dalrymple , for example, found that the wrong ages in his samples were unrelated to crystal size, or any other observable characteristic of the crystal. As discussed earlier, zoning and crystal growth are extremely important in understanding phenocryst ages.
Based on the statements in his essays, Swenson simply assumes that excess argon is present in all of the components of the dacite and that any statements on the lack of a relationship between excess argon and crystal size in Dalrymple automatically apply to Austin's dacite. Again, because Swenson does not provide any page numbers when referring to Dalrymplewe can only guess which sections of Dalrymple's article he is citing.
The results for the Mt.
- References & Further Reading
- Stay Connected!
- St. Helens used in drive to prove biblical creation with science
Lassen plagioclase and the Mt. Etna flow, which contains a HIGH percentage of large phenocrysts, appear to support their contention. Thus, for THESE experiments there does not appear to be any correlation of excess 40Ar with large phenocrysts or with any other petrological or petrographic parameter.
Nevertheless, as discussed in Dalrymplep. Furthermore, if excess argon is relatively abundant in older samples, Ar-Ar dating and K-Ar isochron dating can detect and eliminate its effects as examples, McDougall and Harrison,p. They claim that these pieces of old rock xenoliths contaminated the sample and gave the very old age. Helens lava dome is 'lithic inclusions': Although the mineral concentrates are not pure, and all contain some glass, an argument can be made that both mafic and non-mafic minerals of the dacite contain significant 40Ar.
The lithic inclusions in the lava dome might be thought to be the contaminant, in which case they might add "old" mafic and non-mafic minerals to the young magma. It could be argued that gabbroic clumps in the magma disaggregated as the fluidity of the magma decreased with time, thereby adding an assortment of 'old' mineral grains. These inclusions are, therefore, regarded as a unique association within the recent magmatic system. Sarfati's Support of Flood Geology.
Again, Figure 4 by itself illustrates that ancient phenocrysts were present in the dacite, which would invalidate Austin's dates. Helens dacite, many scientists have been able to isolate specific minerals from older volcanics and successfully date them. Although xenocrysts and xenoliths are very common in the Peach Springs Tuff, Nielson et al.
Unlike Austin, Nielson et al. Because Nielson et al. When confronted by Nielson et al.
Even if excess argon is present in a sample, YECs must still explain the ultimate origin of 40Ar. The Earth's atmosphere currently contains relatively abundant concentrations of argon 0. Where did all of this argon come from if the Earth is only a few thousand years old?
In nature, 40Ar is only known to originate from the radioactive decay of 40K. Some YECs might argue that the 40Ar could have come from the decay of another, unidentified isotope s.
However, this is easier to say than to prove. Any advocates of unidentified parent isotopes need to identify these isotopes, produce any evidence of their former existence, and derive the appropriate decay reactions for them. Other YECs might simply ignore the problem by saying that God created the 40Ar out of nothing 6, to 10, years ago.
Again, this is an unproven fantasy and not science. Rather than invoking unproven miracles and plastering over the issue with 'God did it', scientists seek more profound, meaningful and useful natural answers. Currently, the only reasonable explanation for the presence of abundant terrestrial 40Ar is that the Earth is ancient. Although the Sun is much larger than the Earth, silicates and 40K are more concentrated on Earth. The Sun mostly consists of hydrogen and helium, whereas the Earth has too little mass to retain large concentrations of these volatile elements.
Instead, the relatively low mass of the Earth and its relatively close proximity to the Sun has resulted in silicon, potassium, iron and other less volatile elements concentrating in it. Rather than dealing with this evidence, Austin simply states that the origin of the excess 40Ar requires 'more study'.
In other words, YECs need more time to invent excuses to explain how abundant 40Ar could ever form on an Earth that is supposedly only 6, to 10, year old. WoodmorappeSwenson, and other YECs frequently accuse geochronologists of 'rationalizing away' any anomalous radiometric dates. However, how is the obvious mess in Austin's Figure 4 a 'rationalization'?Scuba Diving at Mount St. Helens : Beyond Is Genesis History? Clip
Dacite lava is too thick to flow very far, so it simply piled up around the vent forming the mountain-like dome, which now sits as a plug over the volcanic orifice. Why does the lava dome provide an opportunity to test the accuracy of radioisotope dating? There are two reasons. First, radioisotope dating methods can be used mainly on volcanic igneous rock, such as dacite.
Fossil-bearing sedimentary rock cannot be directly dated radioisotopically. Second, the date of formation of the dacite is known. This is one of the rare instances in which, to the question, "Were you there?
The concept of radioisotopic dating is fairly simple. The method used at Mount St. Helens is called potassium-argon dating. It is based on the fact that potassium an isotope or "variety" of the element potassium spontaneously "decays", becoming argon an isotope of the element argon. This process proceeds very slowly at a known rate, having a half-life for potassium of 1.