Letters to the editor
(Figures 9-11) or at the termini of interesting and important, but it is Radiohalos in those strange tubes (Figures 12 also important to test the radio- diamonds and 14); activity of the rock in which the (b) earlier investigators claimed diamond was enclosed and not just Mark Armitage's contribution on that all the Irish7 and German8 the diamond. radiohalos in diamonds1 is a valuable halos were found only along 4. As Brown13 and Dutch14,15 have contribution to radiohalo study, but conduits within the minerals; asked, why is it that only isotopes unfortunately he omitted some very (c) Armitage's Figures 4-6 and all of polonium in the decay series of important information about radio- Gentry's figures showing Po uranium, thorium and plutonium halos necessary in their evaluation (all radiohalos unassociated with have been found to produce of which is included in an earlier cracks or conduits are found in the radiohalos? Of the 26 known paper).2 These items are as follows: mineral biotite. Biotite is isotopes of polonium there are 15 1. Armitage did acknowledge (for composed of crystals in the form not in the decay series of these example, on pages 93 and 100) of sheets. The sheets are only one elements which could be dis- that difficulties exist in explaining molecule thick. Thus in biotite tinguished if they were once the relationship between Po halo- one is never more than one-half a created within minerals and then containing rocks and sediments of molecule thickness away from a allowed to decay. Yet, these other the Flood. The reason this is a cleavage plane, and thus a isotopes are not known. If God concern is that by 1989, a total of substantial crack. It is impossible chose to leave His fingerprint in one third of the sites known to to get away from cracks in biotite! rocks to indicate He created them, have Po halos were from rocks It is also significant that Meier and then He chose the isotopes which conventionally understood to be Hecker9 claim that in the biotites can be produced by natural means. 3 Phanerozoic in age — that is, they studied, although the uranium This seems strange ... to me at Flood-derived rocks. To my and thorium inclusions were found least. knowledge neither Gentry nor any within the matrix of the biotite The facts that: other creationist has published a mineral, the polonium was not. (a) the only known Po halos are careful study of any of these sites This suggests that the polonium of isotopes in the decay series of to determine whether the Po- was transported; and uranium (etc.), containing rocks were magmatic (d)to my knowledge neither (b) the Po halos may occur only intrusions dating from the Flood Gentry nor anyone else has in rocks where uranium (etc.) is (the traditional creationist under- produced pictures or other proof found, standing) or whether they were of a Po halo in a non-biotite (c) the Po halos may occur in solidified rocks of the creation, mineral which is not near a crack, concentrations related to the technically emplaced among cleavage plane or hole in the concentrations of uranium (etc.) in Flood sediments (Gentry's under- the rock, 4 enclosing mineral. standing ). If it turns out that Po 3. As of 1989, a majority of the rocks (d) the Po halos may be occurring halos are found in rocks cooled in which Po halos had been found only along conduits, and from a magma extant at the time were reported to have contained (e) the Po halo inclusions may not of the Flood, then the Po in those uranium.10 It was not possible in be embedded in the crystalline cases is not primordial (unless that earlier study to determine structure of the minerals, strongly God created Po atoms during the from the literature if all the rocks suggests that the polonium in Flood). Po atoms would therefore containing Po halos also contained question is not primordial, but that not have to be primordial when uranium and/or thorium, but the it has been transported into place. found in any other setting (for possibility exists that this is the Even if all these things are example, in a diamond). case. I indicated then11 it needed verified (which I suspect they will 2. Armitage claimed (page 95) that to be studied, as a strong relation- be), that is not to say that the Po halos the Po halo figured in his Figure 4 ship between U and Po is implied have been explained. If we are to (page 96) was located in a region in this. Meier and Hecker12 also conclude that fluids brought in the of the mineral without cracks or claim the frequency of Po halos polonium, then under present fissures. This is similar to they found was directly related to conditions such fluids would be Gentry's claims5,6 and Hender- the uranium concentration in the radioactive. Alpha recoil evidence son's before him. However, rocks they examined. This further should then be found in the rock, but 16 (a) it appears from the figures in suggests a connection between U such seems to be absent. This may his article that all Armitage's and Po. The fact that Armitage in turn suggest that present conditions photographs of possible Po halos found no detectable radioactivity do not typify what was happening in diamonds are along cracks in the diamond he studied is when those fluids were passing
CEN Technical Journal 12 (3) 1998 285 through the rock — another case of Creationism, Vol. 2, Technical Symposium, regarding the radiohalos in diamonds. uniformitarianism's failing to explain Sessions and Additional Topics, R. E. Walsh, Wise contends that I 'omitted C. L. Brooks and R. S. Crowell (eds), the past. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, some very important information We need more radiohalo studies, Pennsylvania, pp. 101-102. about radiohalos necessary to their such as Armitage's. We need to 16. Gentry, Ref. 5. evaluation', and then proceeds to reiterate four of the points he argued determine most importantly if 17. I encourage my students to 'think weird' as radiohalos were produced during the creationists. Whatever way conventional in the Creation Research Society 1 Flood. Secondly we need to de- science thinks about a problem, consider Quarterly nine years ago . Wise's termine if polonium is secondary (that turning that approach on its head and arguments are old, and have been is, somehow derived from the decay somehow think the opposite way about the succinctly and sufficiently satisfied same problem — or at least in some radically 2 of other atoms, for example, non-conventional fashion. On this topic, for by Robert Gentry . I can do no better uranium). Thirdly, we need to think example, D. Russell Humphreys is con- than to encourage the reader to imaginatively17 to find a solution to sidering the possibility that there was no request a reprint of the issue3 and read radioactive decay occurring at the time the it for him or herself [or read Dr the truly intriguing question of the polonium was being transported. If there was origin of the polonium halos. a significant period of time in the history of Gentry's letter which follows — ed.]. the earth when radioactivity was 'turned off Although the radiohalos in the Kurt P. Wise, then polonium could be transported and diamond I observed4 were not concentrated at special sites in various rocks. identified via ion microprobe Dayton, Tennessee, When the radioactivity was 'turned on' again, UNITED STATES OF then the polonium halos could form. This is analysis, it is possible that they are AMERICA. an example of the kind of imaginative (or parentless with respect to uranium, weird!) thinking in which I believe we need however, parentless polonium References to be engaged. radiohalos in biotites have clearly been identified in that manner.2 1. Armitage, M., 1995. Internal radiohalos in With respect to the diamond, none of Wise's points has any direct a diamond. CEN Tech. J., 9(1):93-101. bearing: 2. Wise, K.P., 1989. Radioactive halos: geological concerns. Creation Research Point 1: It is not clear whether Wise Society Quarterly, 25(4): 171-176. is redefining 'traditional under- 3. Wise, Ref.2. standing' of crystalline rock formation to include the possible 4. Gentry, R.V., 1989. Response to Wise. Creation Research Society Quarterly, formation of diamonds during the 25(4): 176-180. Flood, but many gemologists 5. Gentry, R.V., 1968. Fossil alpha-recoil would doubtless be interested in analysis of certain variant radioactive halos. arguing that point. Science, 160:1228-1230 (p. 1229). Point 2: Only a few of the 'strange 6. Gentry, R.V., 1973. Radioactive halos. tubes' observed in the diamond Annual Review of Nuclear Science, 23:347- even ascended close to the surface 362 (p. 355). of the processed diamond (none 7. Joly, J., 1917. Radio-active halos. Nature, made contact with the surface), 99:456-458, 476-178. and none of the structures which 8. Schilling, A., 1926. Die radioaktiven Hoefe 'shish-kebab' the halos are cracks. im Flusspat von Woelsendorf. Neues 238U halo cross-section. Idealized three- Jahrbuch Fur Mineralogie, Geologie und They appear, rather, to be solid dimensional illustration of a uranium halo Palaeontologie, Abteilung A, 53:241—265. inclusions as well, and again, are obtained by slicing the halo through the not in contact with the surface of 9. Meier, H. and Hecker, W., 1976. Radioactive centre. Each halo ring is identified by the halos as possible indicators for geochemical appropriate isotope and its alpha energy in the diamond. This means that they processes in magmatites. Geochemical MeV (Million electron Volts). 218Po halos were well encased within a solid Journal, 10:185-195. contain only the three Po rings (see photo diamond matrix (and thus sub- 10. Wise, Ref. 2, Table II. next page) and 210Po halos contain only one jected to the commonly accepted 11. Wise, Ref. 2, p. 175. ring. diamond genesis conditions) 12. Meier and Hecker, Ref. 9, p. 188. which was later processed away 13. Brown, R.H., 1987. Personal communi- by the diamond cutter. Even if cation. there are cracks, however, as Wise 14. Dutch, S., 1983. Creationism still again. Mark Armitage replies: claims, and polonium was Physics Today, 36(4): 11-13. transported along them in solution, 15. Dutch, S., 1987. Critique. In: Proceedings I appreciate the opportunity to how did the tightly packed, 2- of the First International Conference on respond to Dr Kurt Wise's criticisms micron inclusions form at the
286 CEN Technical Journal 12 (3) 1998 radiocentres and not dissipate rocks (Point 1); concerning my polonium halo under extreme conditions (2-3 • how many cracks, fissures, splits research. Because of space lim- times melting point), why are or conduits riddle a biotite (Point itations, I respond only to Wise's there not halos all along their 2); most serious omissions and errors of length, and why did the heat fact. associated with such transport (let • how much U surrounds a sample For over thirty years, I have been alone diamond crystallization) not of biotite — in fact, it is more publishing experimental results anneal the halos? Additionally, devastating to the transport theory verifying that Po halos in granites and Wise claims no knowledge of any to have an abundance of U in the other crystalline rocks did not halos in any crystalline mineral presence of parentless Po halos originate with secondary Po from U unassociated with cracks. I (Point 3); decay, but instead with primordial Po, suggest that he carefully study the • how many different types of Po and hence constitute prima facie radiohalo catalog in Gentry's exist or do not exist (Point 4). evidence of almost instant creation of book5, and in particular, plates 7 those rocks.1-8 What is most revealing and 8, where he will see Po halos Mark Armitage about Wise's attempts to cast doubt in fluorite, a solid non-biotite Azusa, California on the primordial nature of these halos mineral. UNITED STATES OF is that he repeatedly ignores the Point 3: Even if the rock surrounding AMERICA published scientific evidence which the diamond had been preserved contradicts what he is attempting to for my study, and demonstrated establish. As I will now show, what high radioactivity, it would mean References all this means is that the creation only that the diamond possibly 1. Wise, K.P., 1989. Radioactive halos: implications of Po halos in granites travelled through, or was em- geological concerns. CRSQ 25(4): 171-176. now shine brighter than ever. placed in, U-rich rocks on its way Consider first, for example, that 2. Gentry, R.V., 1989. Response to Wise. 1 to the surface. It would not CRSQ 25(4): 176-180. in my 1967 Nature report, I necessarily mean that the diamond 3. Creation Research Society, P.O. Box 8263, published that fossil and neutron- had been formed in a U-rich St. Joseph, MO 64508-8263. induced fission tracks appear in U- matrix. 4. Armitage, M., 1995. Internal radiohalos in a halo centres in biotite, but are absent Point 4: We do not know that these diamond. CEN Tech. J. 9(2):93-101. from Po-halo centres, thus excluding are polonium radiohalos in the 5. Gentry, R. V., 1992. Creation's Tiny Mystery U-bearing solutions as the source of diamond. (Third Edition), Earth Science Associates, Po for those halos, irrespective of In the interest, however, of Knoxville, 364 pp. whether they occur along tiny distilling this ongoing argument down conduits — i.e. microscopic-sized to the single greatest dilemma for microchannels — or whether they those, like Wise, who argue a occur in defect-free areas of the biotite transport-of-Po-solutions-through- where there are no cracks nearby. cracks theory, and to conclusively In sections 4(d),(e) Wise show that the Po radiohalos in biotites essentially ignores these results and are indeed primordial, I would draw attempts to link Po halos in granites the attention of the reader to the ion- with secondary Po by assuming, as microprobe data painstakingly fact, the whimsical claim he made in collected by Gentry.25 These data section 2c — namely that it is stand alone and remain unassailed in impossible to avoid cracks in biotite. their ability to prove that the Po halos The reason Wise is so dogmatic about he studied could never have de- the existence of cracks is that he scended from the U decay chain. absolutely must have them to have Wise and others can argue their any hope of justifying the passage of transport theories until the 'cows the hypothesized secondary Po atoms come home', but their arguments are from some distant U source to the Po specious with respect to the ion- halo centres. microprobe data. The ion microprobe In one instance he uses 'cracks' data conclusively show that the Po to mean conduits along a basal halos in biotites are parentless. This Robert Gentry replies: cleavage plane, and in another is true regardless of: instance to mean visible erratic • what interpretation of Earth I welcome the opportunity to features associated with separations history is used to characterize clarify some important issues between the cleavage planes. I now
CEN Technical Journal 12 (3) 1998 287 cite evidence showing that in both movement would necessarily have results on the ion microprobe cases Wise seriously errs in claiming been accompanied by the a-decay of analyses of Po-halo centres in it is impossible to avoid cracks in such emitters as they moved toward granitic micas.3-5 My book6 discusses biotite. the Po-halo centres along the same why the 206Pb:207Pb ratios reported First of all, anyone who wishes cleavage plane containing the therein are uniquely traceable to the to do so may easily view specta- centres. The recoil nucleus from any radiogenic decay of primordial Po. cularly beautiful Po halos in clear, a-decay produces a tiny recoil pit, Wise mentions neither these reports conduit-free or crack-free areas in or track, which is rendered visible by nor my book.6 Nor does he mention micas in the colour-photo catalogue an HF acid etch of the basal cleavage my 1974 Science report,7 which in my book. There, contrary to plane. In my study I measured the showed quite definitively that 218Po Wise's other claim, they can also find fossil a-recoil density in the basal halos do not have a halo ring from Po halos in fluorite separate from cleavage planes above, below, and 222Rn. This observation rules out a conduits. Secondly, the vast majority through the Po-halo centres. What secondary origin of Po halos, thus of perfect crystals of biotite — and I one observes in these three areas near proving from a completely different have worked with a very large the Po halo centres is the same oc- perspective that such halos could not number of them — do not exhibit recoil track density that is common have formed from secondary basal cleavage separations unless throughout the mica; the background radioactivity derived from U decay, something is done in splitting the density is due to the a-recoils from but instead originated with mica in specimen preparation. the parts-per-million (ppm) primordial 218Po. Wise's failure to This I have demonstrated both by concentrations of U and Th. mention any of this raises serious visual inspection before and after I performed about a hundred questions about his methodology in prolonged immersion of the crystals experiments, which showed that evaluating the implications of Po into an aqueous dye solution before 'excess' a-recoil tracks do not exist halos in granites as they relate to proceeding with either peeling the near Po-halo centres. In his section Earth's instant creation. biotite with scotch tape, or 4e, Wise attempts to cast this result Similar but far more serious mechanically with a sharp blade. in doubt by claiming the absence of methodological questions arise Either of these procedures can induce excess track density is only apparent. because of his failure to reference the cleavage separations, but it is a non- Experiments show this is false. The discoveries in my 1976 Science sequitur to imply — as Wise excess is truly absent. It is wrong to report.8 That is, since Wise contends implicitly does — that these say the excess is only apparently (section 1) that Po halos in granite- experimentally-induced separations absent. Movement of any hypo- type crystalline rocks must somehow are the norm for the original thetical a-emitting precursors toward be halos that formed from secondary unstressed crystals. the Po-halo centres would have left Po activity derived from U decay, Clearly, an investigator can an excess of fossil a-tracks in their and hence would supposedly — in always choose perfect, defect-free wake. And the excess would have his way of thinking — have their crystals to search for halos if he takes been huge, for well-developed Po origin in a Flood-related event, one care to do so. But Po halos in defect- halos show coloration corresponding would have surely thought Wise free areas disprove Wise's claim that to the decay of five billion Po atoms. would have discussed my discovery it is impossible to get away from These results unequivocally disprove of secondary 210Po halos in coalified cracks in the biotite; this result in the hypothesis that Po halos in wood from the Colorado Plateau,8 itself shows that his speculations granites originated from secondary which are very clearly Flood-related about the secondary origin of Po radioactivity, showing instead that specimens. halos in biotite, as described in his they originated with primordial Po. As I note in my book,6 there are section 4, are without any scientific Neither Wise nor anyone else has enormous differences between the foundation. ventured to challenge these results in primordial Po halos in granite-type In a 1968 Science report2 I the established scientific literature. crystalline rocks, and the secondary published a definitive study showing Evolutionists would gladly have Po halos in coalified wood. In that fossil alpha-recoil (oc-recoil) done this if possible to do so, for the granite, the typical U concentration analysis of many Po-containing mica absence of excess a-recoil tracks is in the ppm range. In coalified specimens revealed no excess of unambiguously shows there was no wood it can amount to several radioactivity near Po-halo centres. migration/diffusion of radioactivity percent, more than a thousand times The purpose of the study was to test feeding the halo centres, thus that in granite. In granite, except in whether there was any evidence for powerfully disproving the secondary unusual circumstances, U-daughter any migration/movement/diffusion hypothesis for the origin of Po halos migration is restricted to solid state of any hypothetical oc-emitting pre- in granites. diffusion, an extremely slow process. cursors toward the Po centres. Such In the early seventies, I published In contrast, my 1976 Science report8
288 CEN Technical Journal 12 (3) 1998 presented evidence showing that U 214Po and 218Po halos in coalified In fact dating techniques don't date daughters in solution were quickly wood. That these latter two halo anything. A 'radioactive date' is in transported through a gel-like wood types failed to form naturally under reality only an inference obtained by matrix, thus providing opportunity the very best conditions of high U- interpreting the ratio of the parent for rapid collection of secondary daughter concentrations — coupled and daughter isotopes using the 210Po in lead selenide sites. This is with rapid transport and ideal assumption of uniform radioactive how secondary 210Po halos formed. collecting sites — effectively decay. It is indeed unfortunate that Later this gel-like wood turned to removes any scientific basis for some creationists have accepted this coal with the halos still intact. believing they could have formed by critical assumption when in fact the Now in granite there are four some natural process in U-poor proven existence of primordial Po different types of Po halos; on granite. halos in Earth's foundation rocks occasion two or three types can be This conclusion is additionally effectively disproves the entire seen microscopically in the same confirmed by the fact that primordial uniformitarian principle upon which specimen of mica. This situation is Po halos in granites are uniquely all those dating techniques are virtually impossible to reconcile with distinguished from secondary 210Po based.6'10"12 the hypothesis that such halos halos in coalified wood by the Despite this overwhelming formed from U-decay products distinctly different 206Pb:207Pb ratios. evidence of fiat creation, in his because the different Po-isotope half- The latter unambiguously reflects an section 4, Wise ventures from the lives mean that greatly different origin from U-decay products scientific realm and joins others in quantities of each isotope will whereas the former can be traced to wondering why, if God chose to coexist. In particular, since the the decay of primordial polonium. leave His fingerprints, He didn't expected amounts are directly The laboratory evidence is clear and leave other Po halo types to prove proportional to the different half- unequivocal: primordial polonium instant creation. Wise says this lives, this means that at any given halos do exist in Earth's foundation absence seems strange to him. There time the atomic ratio 210Po:218Po rocks, the granites. Biblically this is are many mysteries in the natural should be about 67,000:1. Thus, if exactly what we expect because their world, but I suggest this is not one Po halos in biotites were from discovery in these rocks fits with the of them. Consider the following. secondarily-derived Po from U precise description of the rocks God Evolutionary geology holds that decay, there should exist about created in the beginning. 'In the granites with Po halos formed 67,000 210Po halos for each 218Po halo. beginning, LORD, you laid the naturally. But in 1979,1 claimed this This is definitely not the case. In foundations of the earth, and the granite-Po-halo combination was a some mica specimens the number of heavens are the work of your hands' miracle of God's creation, 218Po or 214Po halos far outnumbers (Heb. 1:10). impossible to reproduce by any the 210Po halos. Possibly Wise's difficulty in natural methods, and challenged the On the other hand, this accepting the Po-halo evidence for scientific community to disprove it extraordinarily large abundance of creation can be traced to how he by first synthesizing a hand-size 210Po halos agrees with what I interprets earth history.9 The abstract piece of granite and then producing 218 10 discovered in the coalified wood of his talk at the First International a Po in it. I repeated this chal- specimens.8 Moreover, in examining Conference on Creationism (1986) lenge at the 1981 Arkansas creation 6 thousands of secondary Po halos in contains the following statement: trial, again at the widely-attended 'Geologists commonly use only 1982 AAAS symposium, 'Evol- coalified wood, I have yet to find a 11 clear example of either a 214Po or three dating methods. Crea- utionists Confront Creationists', 218Po halo. To summarize: the reason tionists commonly claim each of and since then at a number of for this disparity is that the 139-day these techniques is invalid. university-wide presentations, first at half life of 210Po enabled a sufficient Carefully considered, each the University of Tennessee in 1987, number of these atoms to survive technique has difficulties, but followed by Stetson University in long enough in the gel-like wood to none of them can be considered 1989, Clemson University in 1991, 9 be collected at the PbSe sites, where faulty enough to be invalid.' East Carolina University in 1993, they decayed and formed 210Po halos. This position has enormous Cornell University in 1996, and In contrast, the far more rapidly hidden implications that need to be North Carolina State University in 214 218 exposed. To say that creationists 1997. There has been a deafening decaying atoms of Po and Po — 6 with respective half-lives of 164 must show why dating techniques are silence to all these challenges. microseconds and 3 minutes — invalid actually presupposes their I believe this proves conclusively largely decayed away before they validity; this in turn presupposes the that God did far more than needed to were collected at these same sites. validity of the evolutionary time scientifically validate His creator- This is the reason for the absence of scale. All this is fallacious reasoning. ship. So, what is truly strange to me
CEN Technical Journal 12 (3) 1998 289 is why some evolutionists and others Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA. which is able to handle the many who question the granite-Po-halo 10. Gentry, R.V., 1979. Time: Measured anomalies which crop up, without evidence of instant creation keep Responses. EoS, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, resorting to forced and far-fetched wondering why God didn't provide 60:474. explanations of the evidence. more evidence for creation when, for 11. Gentry, R.V., 1984. Radiohaios in 5. The geologic strata and features are radiochronological and cosmological over three decades, they continue to perspective. In: 'Evolutionists Confront more easily explained in a diluvian be baffled by the Po halos which do Creationists', Proceedings of the 63rd Annual framework as well. exist in these rocks. Meeting of the Pacific Division. American 6. None of the other fields of I therefore suggest that Association for the Advancement of Science scientific study (biology, genetics, 1: 38-65. evolutionists — and all who hold to a astronomy, etc.) can offer any 12. Gentry, R.V. 1986. Radioactive halos: conclusive, irrefutable evidence in belief in an ancient, slowly-evolving implications for Creation. In: The earth — should not be surprised when Proceedings of the First International favour of evolution in general or the scientific truth about God leaving Conference on Creationism, 1:89-112. millions of years in specific. His fingerprints in Earth's primordial 7. Given all of the above, I am now rocks begins to attract world attention. faced with a choice in which literal Indeed, I believe God's special stones six-day creation has at least as good — the granites, Earth's foundation a basis as long-age creation or rocks — will soon fulfil their special What is a day? theistic evolution. Therefore, I appointment with destiny as they cry choose to believe in the literal six out (Luke 19:40) in calling men Dr Helweg1 is right in saying that days of creation. This requires everywhere back to the worship of there is more than one meaning much less faith than it would take our magnificent Creator God possible for 'day', but having spent 15 to consciously deny the proofs (Rev. 14:6-7). years reading and studying the story against evolution and place my of creation with Semitic people, I existence into the hands of blind Robert Gentry assure you that not even once did it chance. Knoxville, Tennessee occur to them that 'day' in Genesis 1 I am very practically minded. If I UNITED STATES OF meant anything other than a 24 hour chose to believe in long ages in Earth's AMERICA period (give or take 12 hours; after all history, what would I gain by it? The they are Eastern in mindset!). respect of a certain sector of intel- References If we accept verse one of the Bible lectuals and scientists who choose to as true, then to wrangle about how reject most or all of the Bible? I can 1. Gentry, R.V. 1967. Extinct radioactivity and long a day is is asinine! Could God live without such respect! the discovery of a new pleochroic halo. Nature, 213:487-490. do it in six 24-hour days or is he a I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep 2. Gentry, R.V 1968. Fossil alpha-recoil analysis wimp? of certain variant radioactive halos. Science, My argument for a literal six-day that which I've committed unto Him 160:1228-1230. creation runs as follows: against that day when we shall meet 3. Gentry, R.V 1971. Radiohaios: some unique 1. God is able to create everything in face to face, knowing also that I Pb isotope ratios and unknown alpha six days. followed Christ's injunction to Jairus, radioactivity. Science, 173:727-731. 2. An unbiased reading of Genesis 1 'Don't be afraid, only believe.' 4. Gentry, R.V et al., 1973. Ion microprobe confirmation of Pb isotope ratios and search leaves the reader with the clear for isomer precursors in polonium radiohaios. impression that it is talking about Mark L. Howard, Nature, 244:282-283. a literal six-day period. Why Ceuta, 5. Gentry, R.V et al, 1974. 'Spectacle' array of would God deceive us? Could he SPAIN 210 Po halo radiocentres in biotite: a nuclear not have said in Hebrew: 'After a geophysical enigma. Nature, 252:564-566. very long time, God formed the References 6. Gentry, R.V, 1992. Creation's Tiny Mystery, sun, the moon and the stars'? Even Earth Science Associates, Knoxville, TN, 3rd edition. See also
290 CEN Technical Journal 12 (3) 1998