Given that lead compounds are fairly soluble in water, this is something that we cannot be very sure of.Using the above assumptions, it is calculated that the zircon crystals have an age of about 1.Other radiometric dating methods are based on similar assumptions.If the assumptions cannot be trusted, then the calculations based on them are unsound.Although assumptions 2 and 3 are not provable, they actually seem very likely in this particular example.Therefore, it seems that the first assumption must be wrong 1.Determining Half-Life By observing how fast U decays into lead, we can calculate the half-life of U This is a theoretical calculation, and we can therefore determine that the half-life of U is 4. If we look at some of the very small zircon crystals in granite, we can accurately measure how much U and Pb the crystal contains.Remember that the half-life is a statistical measure. In order to calculate the age of the rock, we need three other pieces of information: We need to know how fast the U turns into Pb The half-life gives us this value, provided the half-life has never altered during the lifetime of the zircon crystal.    In the same way, one U atom is unpredictable, but a sample containing many millions of U atoms will be very predictable.

Based Upon Assumptions The radioactive decay process above can be seen to produce 8 alpha-particles for each one atom of U The rate of diffusion of helium from a zircon crustal can be measured.

It turns out that this rate of diffusion of helium is compatible with the crystals being about 5, years old, not 1.

A thousand page presentation in Microsoft Powerpoint and Adobe Acrobat rebutting Brent Dalrymple's book: "The Age Of The Earth." Many geology magazine articles contain isotopic ratios with no dates beside them. 20,118 dates older than the evolutionist age [4.5 billion years] of the Earth.

When we run the ratios through Microsoft Excel we get impossible ages. 2,501 dates older than the evolutionist age [10 billion years] of the Galaxy.