Dr. Robert Gentry's Polonium Halos

Dr. Robert Gentry's polonium halos are one of the only arguments against an old earth that's published in a peer-reviewed journal!

One of the better creation evidence arguments is put forth by Dr. Robert Gentry. Now, admittedly, I'm not very happy with Dr. Gentry for passing on the false Lucy's knee hoax about Dr. Johanson, but he does have an argument for a young earth that was actually published in a peer-reviewed journal.

The argument is complicated and concerns polonium halos. It is very difficult, if not impossible, for the non-scientist to analyze or evaluate.

I cover the argument a bit deeper on my Robert Gentry page, but it seemed best to just give this simple report here.

Polonium Halos: The Simple Version

Polonium halos

The picture to the right is of polonium halos in granite. They are caused by polonium-218 breaking down through a series of steps into lead-206.

These rings, formed by that kind of radioactive decay, takes only about a half hour to happen. This is not anywhere near enough time for magma to cool and become granite. Thus, somehow, this granite appears to have appeared without any cooling.

Instant creation? A young earth?

The source for Dr. Gentry's granite is unknown, so no one can actually go examine what happened. It's like a crime scene that can't be searched. Still, there's the granite, and there's the halos.

The only argument against Dr. Gentry's claim that made any sense to me was the argument that the polonium was produced from the decay of uranium. The scientist making the argument says that the uranium decayed—over a period of millions of years—into radon. Radon is a gas. It moved through fissures in the rock, decayed to polonium, and the polonium then produced the halos long after the granite cooled.

Dr. Gentry saying there's no evidence of radon travels in his sample. His opponents say there is.

Obviously, I don't have any way of knowing. I personally heard Dr. Gentry repeat the known false story that Dr. Donald Johanson covered up the location of an Australopithecus afarensis knee, so I don't consider him very honest. In this case, however, it's Dr. Gentry who's published, not his opponents. And he's published repeatedly!!!

Personally, I chalk this up as the best argument ever produced by anti-evolutionists.

However, since it's also the only one that I haven't seen completely collapse under scrutiny, and there is question, it hardly overthrows the abundance of evidence that the earth is old.