Creationist researchers don’t fully understand yet. The decay rate varied based on the stability or instability of the parent atoms. Look again at Figure 1, which is a geologic diagram depicting the rock layers in the walls of the Grand Canyon, along with the rock units deep in the inner gorge along the Colorado River.
This diagram shows that the radiometric dating methods accurately show the top rock layer is younger than the layers beneath it.
That’s logical because the sediment making up that layer was deposited on top of, and therefore after, the layers below.
With the help of this growing body of information, creation geologists hope to piece together a better understanding of the precise sequence of events in earth’s history, from Creation Week to the Flood and beyond.
Part Two of this series showed that the same rocks can yield very different ages, depending on which radiometric dating technique you use.
These inconsistent results are due to the problems of inheritance and contamination, which cause the rocks’ chemistry to differ from the assumptions of standard radioactive “clocks.” Furthermore, new evidence indicates that radioactive elements in the rocks, which are used to date the rocks, decayed at much faster rates during some past event (or events) in the last 6,000 years.
So it is possible that relative radioactive ages of rocks, in addition to mineral contents and other rock features, could be used to compare and correlate similar rocks in other areas to find which ones formed at the same time during the events detailed in Genesis, God’s eyewitness account of earth history. How could recently discovered dinosaur tissue have survived until today?
Why is the first fossil layer filled with such an astonishing variety of life (“the Cambrian Explosion”)?
So if these clocks ticked at such different rates in the past, not only are they inaccurate, but these rocks may not be millions of years old! Potassium today decays faster than rubidium and always gives younger ages.