Age estimates which are obviously wrong or contradictory are sometimes produced.
A popular and supposedly foolproof method was used on two lava flows in the Grand Canyon that should be ideal for radioactive age estimation. Young basalt rock at the Canyon's top produced an age estimate 270 million years older than ancient basalt rock at the Canyon's bottom.
A CRA is derived using an age calculation based upon the decay corrected activity of the absolute radiocarbon standard (1890 AD wood) which is in equilibrium with atmospheric radiocarbon levels (as mentioned previously, 1890 wood is no longer used as the primary radiocarbon standard, instead Oxalic Acid standards I and II were correlated with the activity of the original standard).
What are some of the assumptions made by most Evolutionists in using these systems?
The lowest age defended on a scientific basis is in the 6 to 10 thousand year range.
Evolutionism, of course, requires billions of years to support the plausibility of life's emergence and of subsequent Evolution from “amoeba” to man.
There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological 'clock'." "The age of our globe is presently thought to be some 4.5 billion years, based on radio-decay rates of uranium and thorium.
Such ‘confirmation’ may be shortlived, as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily.