I found several good sources, but none that seemed both complete enough to stand alone and simple enough for a What is radiometric dating?
Others had tried to find an answer in geological processes—e.g.
the pattern was caused by the way the magma was emplaced or how it crystallized. But Drs Humphreys and Baumgardner realized that in other cases there were many independent lines of evidence that suggested that huge amounts of radioactive decay had indeed taken place.
This appears to have been somewhat spectacularly supported when Dr Baumgardner sent five diamonds to be analyzed for C was present.
The diamonds, formed deep inside the earth, are assumed by evolutionists to be over a billion years old.
Young-Earth creationists -- that is, creationists who believe that Earth is no more than 10,000 years old -- are fond of attacking radiometric dating methods as being full of inaccuracies and riddled with sources of error.
When I first became interested in the creation-evolution debate, in late 1994, I looked around for sources that clearly and simply explained what radiometric dating is and why young-Earth creationists are driven to discredit it.
The landmark RATE paper, The paper looks at the various avenues a long-ager might take by which to wriggle out of these powerful implications, but there seems to be little hope for them unless they can show that the techniques used to obtain the results were seriously flawed. carbon-14, or has, over the years, commissioned and funded the radiocarbon testing of a number of wood samples from ‘old’ sites (e.g.
Another dramatic breakthrough concerns radiocarbon. samples with Jurassic fossils, samples inside Triassic sandstone, and samples burnt by Tertiary basalt) and these were published (by then staff geologist Dr Andrew Snelling) in C further, building on the literature reviews of creationist physician Dr Paul Giem.
There must have been speeded-up decay, perhaps in a huge burst associated with Creation Week and/or a separate burst at the time of the Flood.
There is now powerful confirmatory evidence that at least one episode of drastically accelerated decay has indeed been the case, building on the work of Dr Robert Gentry on helium retention in zircons.
The diamonds’ carbon-dated ‘age’ of about 58,000 years is thus an upper limit for the age of the whole earth.