Speed dating teaching technique
Today, we have some 100,000 radiometric dates, the vast majority contributing sensibly to the overall picture.Woodmorappe's main theme, minus the diplomatic wording, is that geologists are cheating like so many schoolboys to make their dates come out right.He is very good at showing the many ways that things can go wrong; he has not shown that things normally go wrong.To be sure, Woodmorappe isn't claiming that his table is a normal sample of radiometric dates. However, in order to make his case against radiometric dating he must, at the very least, show a high percentage of bad dates among the credible radiometric candidates.He plots Woodmorappe's collection of anomalous radiometric results and notices something remarkable.Eat one of those and your tummy will curl right up!(Matson, 1993, p.2) Thus, Woodmorappe is acting more like a mechanic who informs a car owner of the many ways that her car can break down, who quotes numerous horror stories to illustrate his points.
The original data are from a report by Wasserburg and others , who plotted the data as shown but did not draw a 34-billion-year isochron on the diagram.
But even schoolboys need to know what the right answers are in order to cheat, and there was no absolute age list when radiometric dating was first applied to the strata.
Anyone can make up a list of bad cars, bad people, bad neighborhoods, or bad radiometric dates. Is it unsafe for you to drive a car, to meet new people, or to live in a neighborhood? The thing that is lacking in Woodmorappe's argument is statistical balance.
The interpretation that the data represent a 34-billion-year isochron is solely Woodmorappe's  and is patently wrong.
(Dalrymple, 1984, pp.78-79) Whatever the reasons may be for the scatter, the fact remains that these data were clearly a "discard" case.
This super-anomaly was explained away by claiming some strange metamorphic effect on the Sr.