Recently Gill (1996) has posted when you look at the creationist technical literature, claiming that most Rb-Sr isochron ages is explained away as meaningless “false” correlations. The abstract reads:
A mathematical response is presented when it comes to regular incident of false of “fictious” Rb-Sr isochrons. The cause of these inconsistencies is a linear that is simple procedure is mathematically invalid if a couple of independent factors influence an individual reliant adjustable. In lots of data sets for the “isochron” procedure, there are two main separate factors included. First, you have the desired radioactive relation between the amount of the rubidium moms and dad as well as the strontium daughter. 2nd, considering that the strontium that is atomic within the examples is really a variable, then your isotopic Sr-87 content for the atom sic can also be an adjustable. The”Isochron” regression is mathematically invalid, so both its slope and intercept are erroneous in such a situation.
We see four major issues with the creationist claims — adequate to invalidate the creationist paper rather than (since Gill desires) the Rb-Sr dating procedure.