Radiohalos in diamonds

by mark armitage
(California State University Northridge)

Short life radiohalo inside a sealed diamond

Short life radiohalo inside a sealed diamond

Yes, I know you know about radiohalos in granites. I have published my findings on radiohalos in granites from around the world in partial support of Gentry's work along with Andrew Snelling of AIG. By the way Gentry is a good friend, a humble man and knows more Scripture by heart than anyone I have met in the Creation movement. I would be surprised if he knowingly lied as you claim he did, but I suppose we all have feet of clay.

Nevertheless I found radiohalos in SEALED diamonds - the hardest substance known and impenetrable to outside influences..... I published my findings in American Laboratory and at the International Conference on Creation in 2008.

Many gemologists have told me they see radiohalos in gemstones all the time - they are usually cut away as defects..

See the photo - and please - if diamonds are billions of years old - please explain how sort-lived radiohalos formed inside of them. Face it the earth is young.

Comments for Radiohalos in diamonds

Click here to add your own comments

Sep 16, 2014
Maybe not all diamonds are supposedly so old
by: Neal from Cleveland Ohio

Even if not all diamonds are supposedly so old,
that does not somehow explain the radio halos
found in some diamonds.

Please explain by what natural process a diamond
can be formed in a length of time short enough
that a sufficiently large spec of polonium is
embedded within so as to form these characteristic

Of course the explanation that God did it, does
not sit well with those who posit an earth that
is billions of years old. Yet they cannot offer
any better explanation.

Sep 23, 2013
Radiohalos, Evidence of a Young Earth?
by: Paul Pavao (Webmaster)

Okay, to read the entire paper from Mark Armitage, I have to buy it. I don't really want to do that because I'm not real confident that I'm going to understand the issues well enough to give my opinion on the matter.

There are two links in this thread, one to Mark's paper, and one is to a rebuttal. You are welcome to look at them on your own, or if anyone feels qualified to further comment here ... please do.

Sep 22, 2013
try again please Paul
by: Mark Armitage

Paul you wrote: "
Here's a response to Mark Armitage's article on radiohalos: "

Sadly if you had read that "response" you would see that it has NOTHING to do with the radiohalos that I discovered in diamond. That response by a geologist at Union College is complaining to the Editor of American Laboratory for publishing my article in which I ERASE halos from pegmatites (not diamonds) with very LOW temperatures. His letter was NEVER published by American Laboratory - so he posted it online (like that gives it some form of credibility or something).
So please try again, Paul. Evolutionists have NO ANSWER for radiohalos in diamonds - you will not find one, but I invite you to CAREFULLY read what people give you and even ask me before you post silly responses that don't put you in a good public light. Respectfully, Mark.

Sep 22, 2013
Fired from CSUN
by: mark armitage

Yes I was terminated from California State UNiversity immediately after my discovery of soft tissues in a Triceratops horn was published in Acta Histochemica
I was a model employee and was highly recognized over 38 months for my work at the university (they even still use my teaching online for the microscopy students there -
My boss even said he had never seen such a witch hunt before and was asking me why I was being fired! Many evolutionists claim to be tolerant but some cannot tolerate a creationist publishing information that destroys their belief system.
My lawyers have just sent a demand letter to the University - so stay tuned.

Sep 22, 2013
Response to Mark Armitage Article
by: Paul Pavao (Webmaster)

Here's a response to Mark Armitage's article on radiohalos:

I had to go to Facebook and have someone help me find this response.

Creationist sites say that you were fired from your job over the article, Mr. Armitage. Is that true? A friend on FB says you're still listed on the CSUN site as employed, so he is questioning whether that happened. I figure no one can clear that up like you can :-).

I'm running around today so no time to check further. I'll put more notes up tomorrow or Tuesday.

Aug 14, 2013
Comments on radiohalos
by: Mark A

Hi, Paul - no worries about the delay, I know you had a large family to move. I will address your comments in a second but first let me note two typos in my evidence (due to my tired brain no doubt) that I would like corrected...firstly, "Yes, I now you know about radiohalos" should read, "Yes, I know you know about radiohalos" and then "he knowling lied" should read, "he knowlingly lied".

As far as your comments, it is typical for researchers such as myself to summarize the literature and current thinking in discussing the background of a topic - ergo my comment, "Most natural diamonds so far discovered are thought to have crystallized between 1 and 3 billion years ago ... " Providing a background summary on what ACCEPTED thinking (science by consensus) in no way indicates that I AGREE with it. It is simply good writing to acknowledge what the literature says before you attack it with your OWN laboratory RESEARCH. Also just because Glen Kuban (not a degreed scientist) and Lorence Collins spout off about creationist FINDINGS doesn't mean they are correct. They are simply parroting the CONSENSUS science that everyone has agreed to. Neither of them can show you photos of THEIR work because none of them have done any work. Go into the lab and replicate my experiments and PROVE them wrong. Thanks.

Aug 14, 2013
Age of diamonds
by: Paul Pavao (Webmaster)

I guess I'd add this quote from your own paper. I read a lot of it, thinking maybe you address the response on the page I referenced in my last comment.

It appears you do address it, but you seem to agree with it:

"Most natural diamonds so far discovered are
thought to have crystallized between 1 and 3 billion
years ago ... " (

You say "most" here. The point the response was making is that the halos are present only in diamonds not considered primordial (or that at least seemed to be his point).

Aug 14, 2013
Radiohalos & Gary Gentry
by: Paul Pavao (Webmaster)

Again on this post. I apologize for the delay in approving it. It was not on purpose, but because of the busy-ness of a move. I have a large family.

You are welcome to ask Gary Gentry about my assertion about his promoting the falsehoods about Donald Johansen and the Australopithecus Afarensis knee that Johanson found. I think I gave details even on where I heard it.

It was on a one-hour TV show in Knoxville in 1995, probably in the summer, and it was sponsored by a creation museum. I assume it was the one in Tennessee.

There is a response to Gentry's radiohalos that I reference in my page on them. It is at, and it applies to your diamond radiohalos. The pertinent quote is:

"Indeed, since there are many post-Phanerozoic granitic rocks, which are acknowledged by all to be non-primordial, clearly Gentry's reasoning is flawed."

In other words, the answer is that not all diamonds are billions of years old. Curious about your response.

Click here to add your own comments

Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How? Simply click here to return to Creation Argument Invitation.