The Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism (2018)

In any case, it was established by Vardiman et al. (2005) from five lines of evidence (discordant radioisotope ages, helium diffusion, radiohalos, fission tracks, and radiocarbon) that radioisotope decay rates may have been grossly accelerated in a catastrophic event in the recent past (namely, the Flood). Furthermore, it appeared that this accelerated decay was systematic based on the atomic weight, mode of decay, and the present decay rate of the parent radioisotopes. This hinted at the cause being due to changes in the binding forces holding the particles in the nuclei together. The key here is that the acceleration factor was systematic, which means that during the Flood the rocks would have “aged” at consistent rates around the globe as the rocks accumulated. Thus, in a given area a rock unit that has accumulated a lot of radioisotope decay (for example, a rock unit formed in the first month of the Flood) will yield a very much older radioisotope age than a rock unit that has suffered frommuch less radioisotope decay (because of forming in the last month of the Flood). Furthermore, if inheritance, the initial conditions and any contamination are roughly the same in all samples from those rock units, then because the different radioisotope parents have been grossly accelerated systematically according to their atomic weights and present half- lives, their apparent model and isochron ages calculated based on the present decay rates of the parent radioisotopes should essentially agree with one another. Therefore, while the model and isochron ages will be grossly inflated and thus not be absolute ages, they will still be potentially useful as relative ages because they will be in the right order according stratigraphic relationships (Snelling 2010). This assists us in unraveling the time relationships between rock units in a given area when stratigraphic relationships are obscured by lack of outcrops due to erosion and weathering. However, it can also assist us in correlating the rock units in one area with those in another, even on another continent. After all, the radioisotope contents of rock units are simply chemical characteristics of them in much the same way as their petrologic and mineralogical characteristics, and even their fossil contents. Furthermore, the parent radioisotopes in rock units will have all suffered the same amounts of grossly accelerated decay and thus potentially give the same grossly inflated apparent model and isochron ages which will be the same relative ages. Baumgardner (2012) has already discussed in detail the usefulness of radioisotope dates as relative ages and similarly argued that accelerated radioisotope decay rates during the Flood would systematically grossly “age” rocks in the order in which they formed in the same way globally. He reviewed the results of the RATE project (Vardiman et al. 2005), emphasizing that the existence of helium in zircons, radiohalos and fission tracks are all evidence that hundreds of millions of years’ worth of radioisotope decay (as calculated from today’s measured decay rates) had occurred. This amount of decay thus needs to be accounted for by grossly accelerated decay during the Flood and perhaps also during the Creation Week. And because this accelerated decay was systematic as rock units were formed progressively during those biblical events of earth history, the resultant radioisotope dates obtained can be useful as relative ages. In the context of this study it is thus argued that after the Flood waters receded at the same time in various places on different continents, weathering of primary ore deposits would have commenced. Both the receding Flood waters and residual post- Flood catastrophism would have resulted in erosion and exposure Snelling ◀ Flood/post-Flood boundary ▶ 2018 ICC 556 Figure 1. (a) Histogram illustrating the global distribution of 40 Ar/ 39 Ar ages for supergene Mn oxides. (b) Histogram illustrating the distribution of (U-Th)/He ages for the supergene iron oxides goethite + hematite. (c) Histogram illustrating the distribution of 40 Ar/ 39 Ar ages for supergene alunite-jarosite in the Andean region. (After Vasconcelos et al. 2015.)