Radiometric dating lab dating a convicted felon
"The book grew out of a pamphlet written in response to requests from a number of US Geological Survey geologists who wanted a better understanding of potassium-argon dating.
The author attempted to preserve the simplicity of the original pamphlet while making the book more nearly complete and more useful.
Approximately 8 out of 10 specimens ("dates") are discarded by radiometric dating labs because they are well out of range of age they "ought to be" given there source in the geological column.In their book POTASSIUM ARGON DATNG, PRINCIPLES, TECHNIQUES AND APPLICATIONS TO GEOCHRONOLOGY, Dalrymple and Lanphere sum up the whole circular process of radiometric dating: "If the potassium-argon ages of a group of rocks agree with the stratigraphic sequence determined on the basis of physical relationships of fossil evidence, then the probability is good that radiometric ages are reliable..."(page 197) Does Potassium Argon Dating, Principles, Techniques and Applications to Geochronology actually say if the quote above (page 197)? ) Is it common practice for radiometric dating labs to require samples to identified as to their source in the Geological column?(Since it would be better science to blind the dating of the samples, by making sure that the source is unknown to the radiometric dating lab, why is this required? I can speak more to that if that's the question you're [email protected] what you're describing is "blinded." "Double blinded" refers to experiments on humans, in which neither the person running the experiment nor the person being experimented on knows what's supposed to happen.In most publications, scientists list all of the measurements that were made, including those that they ultimately left out of their data analysis, with detailed explanations as to why any dates were discarded - usually with fancy language like "we believe that the specimens may have been contaminated with modern organics during the chemical pretreatment stage", meaning "I'm pretty sure I dropped a hair in there." I've never read a paper that threw out more than 2 or 3 out of 40 dates, and I'm pretty sure that if you were tossing 8 out of 10 dates your paper would never get published in the first place.If you can find a published paper with such a high rejection rate, I would be interested in reading it - something really weird must have been going on.