They said the sample was contaminated with excess argon.
Using new samples of feldspar and pumice they ‘reliably dated’ the tuff at 2.61 million years, which agreed nicely.
Which illustrates that, contrary to popular belief, the dating methods are not the primary way that ages are decided. Their results are always ‘interpreted’ to agree with other factors, such as the evolutionary interpretation of geology and fossils.
Also, can you identify a non Christian scientist who has provided scientific evidence for a young earth. Dear Bob, The only reliable way of knowing the age of anything is by the historical method, by eyewitnesses.
Every other method that is based on making measurements in the present amounts to, "What age would you like?
There is no 'scientific' method that could give us that knowledge.
By the same method we know the age of the earth from the histroy provided in the Bible, which is accurate and reliable.
It's like asking to identify an atheist who argues for the existence of God.