Interesting facts on carbon dating
No matter what the radiometric date turned out to be, our geologist would always be able to ‘interpret’ it.He would simply change his assumptions about the history of the rock to explain the result in a plausible way. Wasserburg, who received the 1986 Crafoord Prize in Geosciences, said, ‘There are no bad chronometers, only bad interpretations of them!The field relationships are generally broad, and a wide range of ‘dates’ can be interpreted as the time when the lava solidified.
Someone may ask, ‘Why do geologists still use radiometric dating?
In fact, he would have been equally happy with any date a bit less than 200 million years or a bit more than 30 million years.
They would all have fitted nicely into the field relationships that he had observed and his interpretation of them.
From the mapped field relationships, it is a simple matter to work out a geological cross-section and the relative timing of the geologic events.
His geological cross-section may look something like Figure 2.
(Creationists do not agree with these ages of millions of years because of the assumptions they are based on.) Because of his interest in the volcanic dyke, he collects a sample, being careful to select rock that looks fresh and unaltered.