They said the sample was contaminated with excess argon.
So, for you to ask to identify a non-Christian scientist who has provided evidence for a young earth is a contradiction in terms.
It's like asking to identify an atheist who argues for the existence of God.
With reference to the theory of evolution, "if in doubt, throw it out". ago...) (if that's the Worst example a creation-site can find to discredit these kind of measurements...
In many universities you are taught "what to think" and not "how to think". then I must say these methods are pretty much awesome ; D !!!!
We point to biblical history as reliable and accurate, and we do our science within that framework.
Of course this involves assumptions, but at least the assumptions are out in the open and we can have a productive discussion on the real issues involved—our presuppositions.
Which illustrates that, contrary to popular belief, the dating methods are not the primary way that ages are decided. Their results are always ‘interpreted’ to agree with other factors, such as the evolutionary interpretation of geology and fossils.
Could you please provide details of a more accurate scientific method of dating which can tell us the age of the earth more accurately than current scientific methods.
Later, this date was confirmed by two other dating methods (paleomagnetism and fission tracks), and was widely accepted.