Real Science Radio: More Soft Tissue Confirms RSR Dino Prediction

User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Stripe said:
Only if you're sold out to evolutionism.

However, scientists have no problem with collecting data.
Click to expand...

Carbon dating is only one form of radiometric dating, and due to its limitations, other forms of radiometric dating are employed. Layers above and below fossil-bearing layers can be directly dated, giving us an absolute age range for the fossil-bearing layer and consequently for the fossils themselves.
 
Stripe

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
User Name said:
Carbon dating is only one form of radiometric dating, and due to its limitations, other forms of radiometric dating are employed. Layers above and below fossil-bearing layers can be directly dated, giving us an absolute age range for the fossil-bearing layer and consequently for the fossils themselves.
Click to expand...

Which does nothing to absolve you of the anti-science stance you advocated, denying there is any need to C14 test dino bones.
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Jonahdog said:
I made a simple suggestion that would eliminate your whining about the lack of carbon dating of dinosaur bones. Sounds to me like a perfectly sensible way to resolve your complaint. Get a creation science lab set up to do the work, collect the fossils and publish. And you accuse me of trolling?

So it is expensive. Get the $ from some televangelist---they seem to be able to rake in the $. Or just add a few bucks to the tuition at Christian fundamentalist colleges. Hit up AiG for the dough.

Put your $ where your mouth is.
Click to expand...

and if they did and the results showed an age less than 50,000 years?
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Stripe said:
Which does nothing to absolve you of the anti-science stance you advocated, denying there is any need to C14 test dino bones.
Click to expand...

Do you see any need to perform Uranium-Lead (U-Pb) radiometric dating directly to fossilized dinosaur bone?
 
Stripe

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
User Name said:
Do you see any need to perform Uranium-Lead (U-Pb) radiometric dating directly to fossilized dinosaur bone?
Click to expand...

Yeah. Good luck finding zircons in a dino bone. :chuckle:

And are we to take this as confirmation that you will always dodge when called out on your anti-science stance?
 
6days

6days

New member
User Name said:
What assumptions are made when using carbon-14 dating?
Click to expand...
There are a few assumptions, such as, the decay rate being constant. We know it hasn't. (Volcanic activity and nuclear testing, for example, affects the ratio). The global flood would have drastically affected the decay rates, so C14 results of 30,000 +/- are consistent with God's Word and the flood of 4500 years ago.
 
Last edited:
6days

6days

New member
User Name said:
Where in this article does it state that the decay rate for 14C has not been constant?
Click to expand...
"Additional complications come from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil, and from the above-ground nuclear tests done in the 1950s and 1960s. Fossil fuels contain no 14
C, and as a result there was a noticeable drop in the proportion of 14
C in the atmosphere beginning in the late 19th century. Conversely, nuclear testing increased the amount of 14
C in the atmosphere, which attained a maximum in 1963 of almost twice what it had been before the testing began."
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
6days said:
"Additional complications come from the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil, and from the above-ground nuclear tests done in the 1950s and 1960s. Fossil fuels contain no 14
C, and as a result there was a noticeable drop in the proportion of 14
C in the atmosphere beginning in the late 19th century. Conversely, nuclear testing increased the amount of 14
C in the atmosphere, which attained a maximum in 1963 of almost twice what it had been before the testing began."
Click to expand...

Where in this quote does it state that the decay rate for 14C has not been constant?
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Stripe said:
1. They didn't find zircons, and
2. http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/40/4/e262.short
Click to expand...

http://geology.gsapubs.org/content/40/4/e263.short

Stripe said:
And your silence confirms that any time you're called on your anti-science agenda, you're just going to ignore it.
Click to expand...

What science have i ignored? Did you ignore this science:

User Name said:
Sedimentary layers cannot be directly dated because the sediment is comprised of preexisting, older minerals. However, other types of layers can be directly dated, such as volcanic ash beds. Using methods such as Potassium–argon dating, layers above and below the sedimentary layer in which a fossil is found can be dated. The age of the sedimentary layer in which fossils are found can then be estimated to be somewhere between the ages of the layers below and above it.
Click to expand...
 
6days

6days

New member
User Name said:
Where in this quote does it state that the decay rate for 14C has not been constant?
Click to expand...
Ok... it actually states that the ratio changes based on conditions. (The actual decay rate may fluctuate with solar flares and neutrinos from the sun.)
The global flood would have drastically affected the C12/C14 ratios so C14 results of 30,000 +/- are consistent with God's Word and the flood of 4500 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top