Geocron clearly stated that their equipment was only capable of accurate results when the sample contained a concentration of argon high enough to be consistent with 2,000,000 years or older.
The equipment in use at the time at the lab employed by Dr.
Austin, Geocron Laboratories, was of a type sensitive enough to only detect higher concentrations of argon gas.
Ancient Days The Exodus Conquest Dating Fiasco by David Does any part of the Before description resonate for you Do you feel beaten down by dating and worried that it s never going to happen for you .
Young Earthers point to an infamous dating error as evidence that the Earth is only as old as the Bible says.
So when my result says the sample was 2.4 billion years old, this is only correct if the sample was at least 10,000 years old to begin with, and it's only correct plus or minus a calculated margin of error, in this example about 600,000 years.
The bell curve of probable age starts at about 1.8 billion years, peaks at 2.4 billion, and dips back to the baseline at 3 billion.So whether you call it an exact science or not is a matter of linguistics.Although the exact age can't be known, the probabilities be exactly calculated. Austin's sample was known to have solidified in 1986, its argon content was clearly well below the threshhold where an amount of argon sufficiently useful for dating could have been present.In addition, the initial amount of K that you started with is never measured directly; instead, it is assumed to always be .0117% of the total potassium present, which is the known distribution in nature.This has a standard deviation, so it also contributes to the margin of error.The first has to do with the reason Geocron's equipment was considered useful only for high concentrations of argon.