Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth

Institute for Creation Research ^ | 12-28-18 | Vernon R. Cupps, PhD

[fishtank]

Helium Retention in Zircons Demonstrates a Young Earth

BY VERNON R. CUPPS, PH.D. * | FRIDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2018

Zircons are tiny crystals of zirconium silicate (ZrSiO4) that originate in igneous rock, which forms when volcanic magma cools. It’s a very stable mineral that melts at 2550°C. Zircon is harder than quartz and almost as hard as diamond. Because of these characteristics, zircon is the mineral most frequently used in various radioisotope dating methods for dating rocks assumed to be at least a few hundred million years old. Its ability to retain impurities within its crystal lattice is very important in establishing the validity of these dating methods.

[fishtank]

[fishtank]

Early diffusion data from GT-2 borehole zircon samples (blue dots) compared with the creation model predictions (green squares) and the uniformitarian model predictions (red squares).

Article image and caption by VR Cupps.

[Ken Regis]

7 or 8K

[humblegunner]

So basically.. you don’t believe the science about a thing
because of some other science? Is that how this works?

[mad_as_he$$]

I thought zircons came from Jared.

[DocRock]

Bookmark

[noiseman]

What’s this about “believ(ing) science?” Real science should be (though frequently is not) a dispassionate, objective search for the truth; an effort to simply discern facts. In this case, we have one scientific claim, namely that the Earth is billions of years old, and we also have a competing scientific claim which cites evidence that suggests the Earth may only be thousands of years old. From here the proper course of action would be to dive deeper into the evidence supporting the competing claims to try to ascertain which claim is better supported by that evidence. That’s how science SHOULD work.

I don’t get the concern that presenting new evidence is somehow a transgression of some sort regarding not “believing” the prevailing scientific assumptions.

[Yo-Yo]

So basically.. you don’t believe the science about a thing because of some other science? Is that how this works?

When this science about a thing has as its exclusive reference source material work from another author from the same Institute for Creation Research, yes, that's how it works.

[hawkaw]

I bet the farm that if we were back when the church believed the earth was flat and the sun and planets were orbiting the Earth, these same people (who think the Earth is only a few thousand years old) would be coming out with papers trying to demonstrate the earth was flat and the sun was orbiting the Earth.

I think these people have too much cognitive dissonance.

[moovova]

Does the helium make the Zircons talk in high squeaky voices?

[Simon Green]

I bet the farm that if we were back when the church believed the earth was flat and the sun and planets were orbiting the Earth, these same people (who think the Earth is only a few thousand years old) would be coming out with papers trying to demonstrate the earth was flat and the sun was orbiting the Earth.

Oh, they're still around A couple of flat-Earthers were just got the Zot a few days ago....

[Paradox]

I first heard about this at least a decade ago, I believe it was debunked back then. But.. I guess I dont really care.

[Izzy Dunne]

The science-haters are at it again.

This was debunked in 2005: Helium as a Clock, not that science matters to these folks.

[Pelham]

“I bet the farm that if we were back when the church believed the earth was flat and the sun and planets were orbiting the Earth,”

I don’t know of a time when the church argued that the Earth was flat. There’s probably more of that going around right now than in the distant past. Any early civilization that sailed over the horizon figured things out.

The belief that Earth is the center of the solar system came from Plato. The Catholic Scholastics who objected to a Sun centered solar system were Neo-Platonists. It’s not at all uncommon for popular philosophy and science to be absorbed by church officials of every era.

IIRC our most common Western ideas of Heaven and Hell can be traced to Book 10 of Plato’s Republic rather than anything actually in the Bible.

[Moonman62]

Helium Diffusion in Zircons

The authors argue that by extrapolating data on the rate of helium diffusion in minerals, the high concentration of helium in zircons can only be explained by a young earth. However, the data presented were taken in conditions of laboratory vacuum and actual diffusion rates in field conditions are known to be considerably lower, by as much as a factor of one thousand or more. The RATE researchers claim to have meticulously accounted for all crystallographic features. However, the diffusion rate of noble gases in minerals is so complex both theoretically and experimentally that helium concentrations are not considered by geochronologists to be reliable for any dating implications.

https://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/rate-ri.htm

[alstewartfan]

I am agnostic about earth’s age. God is eternal, and has existed forever in the past. It is naturalistic evolution that is laughably preposterous. I can’t believe that a solitary rational person could believe it.

[Izzy Dunne]

God is eternal, and has existed forever in the past.

How do you know that?

[alstewartfan]

It is virtually impossible for an entire universe made of amino acids to build a single functional protein, let alone an enzyme, organ or organism. Logic dictates God.

[Bulwyf]

Because God’s word says that is so.

Either you believe God’s Word or you don’t.

[Izzy Dunne]

Ah, the "god of the gaps" fallacy.

It is virtually impossible for an entire universe made of amino acids to build a single functional protein

Yet, it gets closer to reality every day. And you still didn't answer the question: How do you KNOW that?