Recently Gill (1996) has published into the creationist technical literature, claiming that most Rb-Sr isochron ages are explained away as meaningless “false” correlations. The abstract reads:
A answer that is mathematical presented when it comes to frequent incident of false of “fictious” Rb-Sr isochrons. The cause of these inconsistencies is the fact that a linear that is simple procedure is mathematically invalid if a couple of separate factors influence a single dependent adjustable. In a lot of information sets for the “isochron” procedure, there are two main independent factors included. First, there is certainly the desired relation that is radioactive the total amount of the rubidium moms and dad while the strontium daughter. 2nd, considering that the atomic strontium concentration when you look at the examples is really an adjustable, then your isotopic Sr-87 content for the atom sic is also an adjustable. In such a situation, the “Isochron” regression is mathematically invalid, therefore both its slope and intercept are erroneous.
We see four major difficulties with the creationist claims — adequate to invalidate the creationist paper instead of (because Gill desires) the Rb-Sr procedure that is dating.
1. Math versus chemistry:
The behavior of isochron information is constrained in 2 methods — both with what is mathematically feasible regarding the plot, in addition to with what is actually possible provided the chemistry of this appropriate elements. Gill’s theoretical therapy concentrates solely on mathematical behavior, while ignoring the underlying chemistry.