Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 117 (8777 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-17-2017 2:02 AM
352 online now:
AZPaul3, CRR, frako, GDR (4 members, 348 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: DOCJ
Post Volume:
Total: 816,103 Year: 20,709/21,208 Month: 1,142/2,326 Week: 478/345 Day: 1/134 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
89101112
13
Author Topic:   Creationist problems with radiocarbon dating
Taq
Member
Posts: 6991
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 182 of 194 (684655)
12-18-2012 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 181 by morningstar2008
12-18-2012 4:08 AM


Re: Radiocarbon Dating and basics of radioactive decay
It is my understanding that during the approach to the measurement of the curve of infinity is absurd.
Well, that just proves that only a ruler to measure the radiocarbon dating does not make sense.
I understand you correctly?
I think Mr. Kayot it will be interesting.

There are many sources of contamination in the 14C methodology. There is extraneous 14C introduced during sample preparation, there is small amounts of 14C in the equipment itself, and any measuring device will have an inherent background. On top of that, nitrogen in the sample can be turned into 14C by high energy particles just as it occurs in the upper atmosphere. These small but significant sources of background mean that we can not measure very old ages where very little 14C is left. What you need is 14C levels that are well above background in order to get accurate dates.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by morningstar2008, posted 12-18-2012 4:08 AM morningstar2008 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by morningstar2008, posted 12-18-2012 12:03 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
morningstar2008
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 43
From:
Joined: 12-11-2012


Message 183 of 194 (684672)
12-18-2012 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by Taq
12-18-2012 11:11 AM


Re: Radiocarbon Dating and basics of radioactive decay
What you need, 14C levels that are significantly above the background to get the exact date.
_____________________________
The exact date of combustion deposits exposed in this case I'm talking about the angle, you can not. The reason for this in my opinion is quite clear C14 could disappear. Well, not quite sure but the deformation measurements on my view of the face. As for the chalk and limestone, then there is not even worth trying.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Taq, posted 12-18-2012 11:11 AM Taq has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 184 of 194 (684750)
12-18-2012 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by morningstar2008
12-18-2012 3:55 AM


Re: Radiocarbon Dating
I think that the fight against the creationists is killing a lot of time in the modern scientist.

Working scientists spend essentially no time and energy worrying about what creationists do or say. There is no scientific debate about whether the earth is only 6000 years old.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by morningstar2008, posted 12-18-2012 3:55 AM morningstar2008 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by morningstar2008, posted 12-18-2012 2:40 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
morningstar2008
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 43
From:
Joined: 12-11-2012


Message 185 of 194 (684755)
12-18-2012 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by NoNukes
12-18-2012 12:54 AM


Re: Radiocarbon Dating and basics of radioactive decay
What event are we describing using a date result of 50 billion years, or even 20 billion years? Aren't those values greater than the current age of the entire universe? (ducking head before you know who shows up...)
__________________________________
That's just not dive dive and swim out of DCG have one. Although I must warn that the material output itemized. And turned chocolate therapy. Yes figure certainly stunned. But in order to understand that this figure should be tough to learn a few rules. Of these 20, only 600 million devoted to what would life on Earth emerged. Rest of the planet just walked around the universe in search of where to perch oneself. Of course, I once again allowed himself to offer a shocking material. But such laws of the universe. It can be compared with a pool table. When the ball just before getting into the pocket for a long time yet to hang on a billiard table in search of the pockets. In the billiard balls to break a rule. So the universe is taken to break the balls explosion of supermassive stars. Explosions of stars is more indicators of astronomers and they are required to monitor these actions, but here are the rules change slightly. And we decided to recognize an explosion geological means. Planet after such an explosion ripped out half. With deep crater almost to the northern hemisphere. I'm surprised you can tell the fact that the geology of seeing that the northern hemisphere is not like the South had not given thought to the reasons why such a difference resonance. And the difference is really shocking. First it is the low-lying area on the planet. This refers to the continental lowlands. Well in the ocean due to not count. And the Arctic Ocean so that even hid the continental shelf to the head. And that the Arctic Ocean is a funnel from the blast. Young mountains of the northern continent forcibly suggest is that in the past magmatic area full planet. And the old lithospheric rock wiped off the face of the planet. Though. Not hard to guess, and for the fact that Cretaceous sediments are located only on the perimeter of the large crater. Well, a number of features that are simply not able to squeeze in a short message. Although gentlemen scientists need to understand that even for these few lines are years of hard work. And they get this stuff as on a platter. Also referred to as the creator of the theory is not flattering words.
And maybe when they will not be for this very ashamed.

Just do not dive to dive and swim out of DCG is. Although I must warn you that stuff out painted. And it was chocolate therapy. Yes, of course, figures stunned. But in order to understand what the rate should be tough to learn a few rules. Of these 20, only 600 million is dedicated to what would life on Earth originated. The rest of the world just walked around the universe in search of where to perch oneself. Of course, I was once again allowed himself to offer a shocking material. But such laws of the universe. This compares with a pool table. When the ball just before it reaches in his pocket for a long time to hang on the table in search of pockets. In the billiard balls to break the rules. So, the universe is taken to break the balls explosion of supermassive stars. Explosions of stars more than in astronomy and they are required to monitor these actions, but here are the rules change slightly. We decided to recognize the explosion of geological resources. Planet after such an explosion ripped half. With a deep crater, almost to the northern hemisphere. I'm surprised that you can tell that the geology, seeing that in the northern hemisphere is not like the South did not think about the reasons for this difference resonance. And the difference is really shocking. First of all it is a valley on the planet. This applies to the continental lowlands. Well, in the ocean due to not count. And the Arctic Ocean, so that even hid the continental shelf in the head. And the fact that the Arctic Ocean is a funnel from the blast. Young mountains of the northern continent forcibly indicate that in the past with the planet's magma. And the old lithospheric rock wiped off the planet. Though. Not hard to guess, and for the fact that Cretaceous sediments are located just on the perimeter of the large crater. Well, a number of features that are simply not able to squeeze in a short message. Although gentlemen scientists need to understand that even these few lines of years of hard work. And they get this stuff, like on a plate. Also referred to as the founder of the theory is not flattering words.
And maybe they will not be for this very embarrassing.
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/...702.1/0_801e4_a33fd151_XXL.jpg


This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by NoNukes, posted 12-18-2012 12:54 AM NoNukes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Coyote, posted 12-18-2012 7:39 PM morningstar2008 has not yet responded

    
morningstar2008
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 43
From:
Joined: 12-11-2012


Message 186 of 194 (684757)
12-18-2012 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by NoNukes
12-18-2012 2:18 PM


Re: Radiocarbon Dating
But I think this is not a fight against creationists, and the struggle between the two systems. And this aspect has long been a need to remember. is that the creationist movement leaders do not want to without a fight to take their positions. And they go to any trick that would return the power they so shamefully lost.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by NoNukes, posted 12-18-2012 2:18 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5927
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 187 of 194 (684835)
12-18-2012 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by morningstar2008
12-18-2012 2:33 PM


Re: Radiocarbon Dating and basics of radioactive decay
Your post has nothing to do with radiocarbon dating.

Please limit your posts on this thread to the topic of radiocarbon dating.

Posts on other subjects should be in more appropriate threads.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers


This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by morningstar2008, posted 12-18-2012 2:33 PM morningstar2008 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18855
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 188 of 194 (685279)
12-21-2012 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by morningstar2008
12-17-2012 7:49 AM


Re: Calibration of Radiocarbon Dating, an old earth, and calibrations
Hi morningstar2008

Very well that you have asked me this question. First vaunted translator gave the wrong information that I gave. And you did the right thing that we decided to clarify. I agree to a change of correlation transitions, but do not know how our interpreter works. Smooth layered limestone rocks of Cretaceous rocks can ...

... not be dated with radiocarbon dating, the topic of this thread.

... As for the asteroid is the Mariana Trench is just a place to drop. ...

The Mariana Trench is not an impact crater, it is a subduction wrinkle\fold\crease in the mantle.

... But so far, however, these periods of life of the earth to me are little known. We still have to work hard.

YOU have work to do. The science side is pretty well settled.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by morningstar2008, posted 12-17-2012 7:49 AM morningstar2008 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18855
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 189 of 194 (685301)
12-21-2012 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by morningstar2008
12-18-2012 4:08 AM


Re: Radiocarbon Dating and basics of radioactive decay
Hi Morningstar2008

It is my understanding that during the approach to the measurement of the curve of infinity is absurd.

To add to what Taq said:

... These small but significant sources of background mean that we can not measure very old ages where very little 14C is left. ...

If we look again at the curve (from 14C Calibration and Correlations ):


Graph of actual 14C content versus actual time intervals from time "X"

IF the background level were 0.04, for example, then wherever that horizontal line intersects the curve would be the limit to the method, in this case it would be around 22,500 years.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by morningstar2008, posted 12-18-2012 4:08 AM morningstar2008 has not yet responded

  
samreddevilz 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1421 days)
Posts: 7
Joined: 06-10-2013


Message 190 of 194 (701459)
06-19-2013 2:55 PM


Thanks mate for this superb post. I realize that you did a deep analysis for this great Post.
Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by AdminNosy, posted 06-19-2013 4:28 PM samreddevilz has not yet responded

    
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4753
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 191 of 194 (701467)
06-19-2013 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by samreddevilz
06-19-2013 2:55 PM


Please Think More -- Post Less
It is nice to have you here but please don't post contentless messages so much. Only if you have a question or something to contribute please
This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by samreddevilz, posted 06-19-2013 2:55 PM samreddevilz has not yet responded

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 154 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 192 of 194 (705110)
08-23-2013 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Coyote
04-19-2010 10:07 AM


I propose this thread to examine creationist claims about radiocarbon dating, and in particular the purportedly young ages that are sometimes found in materials that are actually very old.

This is important because these supposedly young ages are being used to "prove" a young earth.

Coyote, just some questions about radiocarbon dating itself,

1) Is carbon 14 produced in relatively small quantities (relative to carbon 12) in the atmosphere?
2) Is its production directly reduced by a stronger magnetic field?
3) Is the magnetic field currently weaker now than in times past?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Coyote, posted 04-19-2010 10:07 AM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Coyote, posted 08-23-2013 11:01 AM mindspawn has responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5927
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 193 of 194 (705119)
08-23-2013 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by mindspawn
08-23-2013 7:07 AM


C14 answers
1) Is carbon 14 produced in relatively small quantities (relative to carbon 12) in the atmosphere?

Yes, in very small quantities: about 1 part per trillion.

2) Is its production directly reduced by a stronger magnetic field?

As C14 is produced by cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere, it varies somewhat due to the fluctuations in cosmic rays and these, in turn, vary somewhat due to changes in the earth's magnetic field.

3) Is the magnetic field currently weaker now than in times past?

Wiki says the field is currently decreasing, but "this strength is about average for the last 7 thousand years, and the current rate of change is not unusual."

Fluctuations in the levels of atmospheric C14 would be a problem for C14 dating if there was no correction for this effect. By dating individual tree rings in old wood a correction factor can be established.

It works like this: certain types of trees are know to grow only one ring per year and to be exceptionally long-lived. By dating individual rings back thousands of years a "calibration curve" can be worked out to correct conventional radiocarbon dates for atmospheric fluctuations. If I recall correctly, the change never gets beyond about 10 or 11 percent.

In addition to tree rings, there are a number of other things that produce annular "rings" that can be dated and used to establish a calibration curve. Several of these are illustrated in the following graph:

As you can see, several different materials all produce similar results.

Hope this helps.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers


This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by mindspawn, posted 08-23-2013 7:07 AM mindspawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by mindspawn, posted 08-27-2013 10:50 AM Coyote has acknowledged this reply

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 154 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 194 of 194 (705441)
08-27-2013 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 193 by Coyote
08-23-2013 11:01 AM


Re: C14 answers
Thanks, since you have started a new thread on this, we can continue our discussion there.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Coyote, posted 08-23-2013 11:01 AM Coyote has acknowledged this reply

  
RewPrev1
...
89101112
13
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017