Absolute dating radiometric dating
Furthermore, the seven samples from the small amphibolite unit near Clear Creek, which should all be the same age because they belong to the same metamorphosed basalt lava flow, yielded K-Ar model ages ranging from 1060.4±28 Ma to 2574.2±73 Ma.
This includes two samples only 0.84 meters apart that yielded K-Ar model ages of 1205.3±.2±73 Ma.
And the K-Ar model "ages" are so widely divergent from one another (ranging from 405.1±10 Ma to 2574.2±73 Ma), even from very closely spaced samples from the same outcrop of the same original lava flow, as to be useless for "dating" any event.
These discordant results could easily be dismissed as an isolated aberration, perhaps due to the uncertain effects of metamorphism and any subsequent alteration, especially during erosion and weathering.
However, the radioisotope dating of these Grand Canyon rocks clearly demonstrates that the disagreement, or isochron discordance, is pronounced.
However, they are confirmation of the repeated failure of all the radioisotope "dating" methods to successfully date Grand Canyon rocks.
but tenuous "explanations" are given to account for the anomalous amounts of daughter products, and avoid the inescapable conclusion that the radioisotope methods simply do not yield reliable absolute ages.
Yet the RATE research has uncovered much evidence, including the patterns of these discordances between the "dates" from the different radioisotope systems, For example, if accelerated radioisotope decay occurred, then alpha-decaying radioisotopes would yield older isochron "ages" than beta-decaying radioisotopes, which is exactly the pattern in the Brahma amphibolites (see diagram above).
Because the different radioisotopes are dating the same geologic event, to have produced different "dates" has to mean that the parent radioisotopes have decayed at different rates over the same time period.