Any age calculated is based on multiple unprovable assumptions to match the long-age worldview.Kevin Rogers submitted a comment to that article (reproduced below, edited to focus on substantive issues), to which Dr Jim Mason replies.Where the bottom part intersects the Concordia curve is said to be the ‘age’ of the metamorphic event.However, this only works if there is one metamorphic event.My comment about the inclusion of uranium and exclusion of lead during the formation of zircon crystals was just a repeat of an assertion made by Dr Payne.
Uniformitarians assume magmas crystallized slowly over millions of years under conditions of thermodynamic equilibrium.
He has equipment at the University of Adelaide and does the dating analysis himself.
Thus he has the knowledge of an experienced practitioner and is not just an armchair theoretician.
However, the biblical scenario suggests magmas crystallized quickly, and anticipates non-equilibrium conditions, and this would affect the way lead would have been incorporated in the zircon crystals.
Geologists now recognize that granites formed very rapidly, which is consistent with the biblical scenario.