>This 'anomaly' in dating appears to parallel the claims made by Dr. Robert
>Gentry regarding polonium atoms found encased in ancient granites, and
>identified by the 'pleochroic halos' or darkened rings due to alpha
>radiation that was used to identify the polonium. Po has a very short
>half-life, so this appears to imply that the 'ancient' granites were really
>recent.
It interests and intrigues me that such an anomaly is written off so
quickly by Christian scientists who might have a vested interest in
following up on it. I am sure sceular scientists would not be so quick to
write it off. And perhaps Snelling is to be blamed for not trying to find
an explanation within the long ages paradigm, although given his
perspective on such things, perhaps he is no more guilty than the rest of
us. Sure, gentry has flaws, (perhaps not so much in his work as in his
personality), but let's not be so quick to cast Snelling in the same mold.
Since he did not report the work to us himself, we do not know what steps
he has taken to secure the data. But we were quick to assume we knew all
the details, and that it was just another example of over-eager YEC's
trying to defend their position without adequate preparation. Maybe he has
published this in an appropriate journal (although, given your attack on
Gentry, this in itself is not enough to protect him from our criticism, if
his views are different from ours). This is the Christmas season...let
Snelling's work stand, at least for a while until further studies support
or refute it, something we cannot possibly do from our armchairs. Just my
take on what I have seen as knee jerk reactions to this report.
Art
http://chadwicka.swau.edu