Another example of radioactivity measurements showing young earth ages. I have only copied the last of the article published by ICR.

Humphreys used the argon data from Figure 2 to compute the age of sample 5 to be 5,100+3,800 -2,100 years, where 5,100 years was his best estimate with the lowest age of 3,000 years and the oldest age of 8,900 years. Humphreys’ lower estimate of 3,000 years was the same as the estimate made by Harrison et al.4

Conclusions

Humphreys concluded that the observed high argon retentions shown in Figure 2 conflict severely with the uniformitarian-assumed long ages. These data say that the feldspar in the Fenton Hill borehole generated over a billion years’ worth of argon-40 and then retained it during a period of time that began only thousands of years ago.The argon data thus support accelerated nuclear decay, RATE’s young helium age, and the biblical youth of the world. Consequently, we can say that both argon and helium diffusion rates agree that the earth is only thousands of years old.

NEW BOOKS

I apologize for not posting more often in this blog. I read something everyday that should be here, but I don't get around to posting. The Institute of Creation Research had a summer sale and I bought some bargain books both for me and sent some to the Cross Plains Public Library. I checked the other day and they only had a couple of creation science books. And those hadn't been checked our. I have been thinking about writing essays for publication in the Review to let people know what is in the Library and on the Internet. I wrote a Livestock Weekly column on this subject for next week.

I am reading a couple of the books. One is Biblical Creationism by Henry M. Morris, written before he died that goes through the entire Bible showing how all of the books support the concept of a young earth and belief that God created the universe in six literal days. A recent argument in Creation Matters published by the Creation Research Society argued that the age of the earth is history not science and that the historical report in the Bible may be the correct age of the earth. That same publication had four of five essays showing the problems with the astronomy assumptions of long ages that are not supported by the many solar observations.

I am also reading THE GENESIS FACTOR: Myths and Realities edited by Ron J. Bigalke, Jr. that argues with Hugh Ross' position on creation by millions of years. It argues strongly for the young earth creation concept. I also have the book by Sarfarti arguing with Ross but haven't read it yet. It is quoted often. Bigalke's book is a number of essays about geology, flood, astronomy, RATE report (that looks at radioactivity measurements) that all support young earth theories.