Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 124 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-21-2017 2:00 PM
465 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume:
Total: 799,066 Year: 3,672/21,208 Month: 2,067/1,605 Week: 267/376 Day: 57/113 Hour: 0/16


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
282930
31
3233Next
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5529
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 451 of 483 (755586)
04-09-2015 7:15 PM
Reply to: Message 450 by OS
04-09-2015 5:44 PM


For OS
They don't, because the amount rings of the tree is meaningless to carbon-14 dating.

This is absolutely wrong.

But feel free to try and prove that your statement is accurate, if you think you can.

(Remember to bring some evidence.)


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

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by OS, posted 04-09-2015 5:44 PM OS has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18136
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 452 of 483 (755676)
04-10-2015 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 440 by OS
04-09-2015 9:06 AM


OS and tree rings
Hi OS and welcome to the fray

... But the Geiger counter seems to rule tree ring dating. ...

Not sure what you mean here. 14C dating is not done with a Geiger counter, but with much more precise instruments:

http://www.c14dating.com/agecalc.html

quote:
In an earlier section we mentioned that the limit of the technique is about 55-60 000 years. Obviously, the limit of the method differs between laboratories dependent upon the extent to which background levels of radioactivity can be reduced. Amongst accelerator laboratories there has been mooted the theoretical possibility of extended range dating to 75 000 yr +, at present this seems difficult to attain because of the problems in accurately differentiating between ions that mimic the mass and charge characteristics of the C14 atom. Beukens (1994) for instance has stated that this means the limit of the range for his Isotrace laboratory is 60 000 yr which is very similar to the conventional range.

Figure 1: This gif shows the comparison in radioactivity between a sample, or unknown (green area) , a modern standard (dark blue) and a background (small red peaks) derived from beta decay. The scale represents log E (energy).


As you can see there is less 14C (green) in the sample of unknown age than in the standard sample (blue).

... Most trees don't grow new rings. They have them at once and they become distinct and spread with age.

I'm sorry, but this is patiently false information,and whoever told you this was providing you with false information.

The first growth (sprouting) of a tree occurs with pith and it does not contain any rings at all. This is retained in the trunk as a pith center around which the rings form as the tree grows.

Please note that this can be -- and has been -- tested: you can take a core sample from a tree and then come back 5 or 10 years later and take another core. What you will find is that the rings in the original core are still the same width in the later core, and that the later core has new additional rings at the outer perimeter, normally one for each year that has passed since the first core.

The fact that thousands of scientists have for hundreds of years used this information to measure ages of timbers used in constructions should be evidence enough that what you said would be impossible to have occurred as it would not be possible to use such a growth pattern for such measurements.

You can also test this by cutting through the bark and the cambium layer ...

quote:
Wood, in the strict sense, is yielded by trees, which increase in diameter by the formation, between the existing wood and the inner bark, of new woody layers which envelop the entire stem, living branches, and roots. This process is known as secondary growth; it is the result of cell division in the vascular cambium, a lateral meristem, and subsequent expansion of the new cells. Where there are clear seasons, growth can occur in a discrete annual or seasonal pattern, leading to growth rings; these can usually be most clearly seen on the end of a log, but are also visible on the other surfaces. If these seasons are annual these growth rings are referred to as annual rings. Where there is no seasonal difference growth rings are likely to be indistinct or absent.

If there are differences within a growth ring, then the part of a growth ring nearest the center of the tree, and formed early in the growing season when growth is rapid, is usually composed of wider elements. It is usually lighter in color than that near the outer portion of the ring, and is known as earlywood or springwood. The outer portion formed later in the season is then known as the latewood or summerwood.


quote:
A cambium (plural cambia or cambiums), in botany, is a tissue layer that provides undifferentiated cells for plant growth. It forms parallel rows of cells, which result in secondary tissues.[1]

Briefly speaking the cambium layer is where the growth occurs in trees, it lies between the bark (the outer parts being dead cells) and the wood interior (also dead cells). Each year this layer adds new growth around the outside of the deadwood core, which then dies before the next layer is added outside it.

If you cut the bark and cambium layer off in a ring around a tree trunk the tree will die, and if you take off just the dead bark outside, the bark will be repaired. This proves that the growth occurs in the cambium layer.

Message 443: You always keep track of the date when you pull something from a tree. The results don't always represent tree ring growth.

Again this sounds confused, and is likely due to misinformation on your end.

Let me guess, you measure every ring as it expands too. ...

Again, the rings don't expand after they have died, only the new ring that is forming is where there is growth, and this ring is not used in dendrochronology measurements because it is incomplete.

... It is interesting to me how paper seems to date better than corpses.

Can you provide references to this? I can think of several reasons for this to occur, however to best understand your argument I would need to see its source.

Message 450:
Capt Stormfield writes:

How do the trees manage to know in advance how old they are going to get?

They don't, because the amount rings of the tree is meaningless to carbon-14 dating. You pretend to have studied this on a cell level. All rings of the tree tend to get bigger with age.

Actually there are thousands of scientists you have actually studied this on the actual cell level, and curiously they came to the conclusion that tree rings do not expand with age because the wood core is composed of dead cells.

If you are going to attempt to invalidate 14C dating then you need to use actual valid information.

Can you please provide the source of your misinformation? What tests have you done to validate your claims?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 440 by OS, posted 04-09-2015 9:06 AM OS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 453 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 3:23 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 456 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-10-2015 8:51 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
OS
Member (Idle past 588 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 453 of 483 (755678)
04-10-2015 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by RAZD
04-10-2015 2:30 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Why didn't you notice how the rings in the middle are getting bigger? Did you ever notice that I don't respond to much? Usually, when you post to me, it is unworthy.

I am unfamiliar with other instruments that do what a Geiger counter does.

You thought I wanted to invalidate C14 dating? I know you are confused.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by RAZD, posted 04-10-2015 2:30 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 454 by JonF, posted 04-10-2015 4:05 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 455 by RAZD, posted 04-10-2015 5:33 PM OS has not yet responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 3410
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 454 of 483 (755680)
04-10-2015 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 453 by OS
04-10-2015 3:23 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Why didn't you notice how the rings in the middle are getting bigger?

I don't see any pictures of rings in one tree getting larger over time.

Did you ever notice that I don't respond to much? Usually, when you post to me, it is unworthy.

RAZD mostly knows his stuff. You would do well to study and learn from his messages.

I am unfamiliar with other instruments that do what a Geiger counter does.

Irrelevant. Geiger counters have nothing to do with tree ring dating. When tree samples are dated with 14C the most usual instrument is a mass spectrometer counting the atoms individually by weight. Whether or not they are radioactive.
You thought I wanted to invalidate C14 dating? I know you are confused.

Well, it's certain you are horribly confused because pretty much everything you have said about tree rings is false, s has been pointed out at least twice.

So what are you trying to do? Make up false stories about trees? What?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 453 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 3:23 PM OS has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18136
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 455 of 483 (755686)
04-10-2015 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 453 by OS
04-10-2015 3:23 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Why didn't you notice how the rings in the middle are getting bigger?

Because they don't? Do you have anything other than your assertions for evidence they do?

Did you ever notice that I don't respond to much? ?...

Nope, I assume most people spend time doing other things, some even doing research and thinking about how things really work.

... Usually, when you post to me, it is unworthy.

How do you judge unworthiness? What is your way to measure of reality? I'm curious.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 453 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 3:23 PM OS has not yet responded

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 247
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 456 of 483 (755706)
04-10-2015 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by RAZD
04-10-2015 2:30 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
The fact that thousands of scientists have for hundreds of years used this information to measure ages of timbers used in constructions should be evidence enough that what you said would be impossible to have occurred as it would not be possible to use such a growth pattern for such measurements.

Who needs scientists. That picture next to my name is a logging truck. On the subject of tree rings, this guy doesn't know his ass from a hot rock.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by RAZD, posted 04-10-2015 2:30 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 457 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 04-10-2015 9:16 PM Capt Stormfield has responded
 Message 458 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 9:47 PM Capt Stormfield has responded

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member
Posts: 558
Joined: 02-12-2015


Message 457 of 483 (755710)
04-10-2015 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 456 by Capt Stormfield
04-10-2015 8:51 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Capt Stormfield writes:

That picture next to my name is a logging truck.

And a *sweet* classic one at that.

JB


This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-10-2015 8:51 PM Capt Stormfield has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 459 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-10-2015 9:48 PM ThinAirDesigns has responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 588 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 458 of 483 (755712)
04-10-2015 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 456 by Capt Stormfield
04-10-2015 8:51 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
It's a myth. Tree ring dating does not improve radiocarbon dating, and the data prove it. Tree rings are not all produced one per year; and they aren't very distinct in small trees. It's NUTBALL JUNK.

It is obvious radiocarbon dating is not based on it.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-10-2015 8:51 PM Capt Stormfield has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 460 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-10-2015 9:50 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 461 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-10-2015 10:10 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 462 by AZPaul3, posted 04-10-2015 10:21 PM OS has not yet responded
 Message 464 by Coyote, posted 04-10-2015 11:25 PM OS has responded
 Message 469 by RAZD, posted 04-11-2015 2:25 PM OS has not yet responded

    
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 247
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


(1)
Message 459 of 483 (755713)
04-10-2015 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 457 by ThinAirDesigns
04-10-2015 9:16 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
I sincerely wish it belonged to me. It's a '72 Hayes W-HD, a step below the HDX which was the really big one. 12V-71. 5x4 trans. Perfectly restored, lives in Port Alberni.

You can ride along with the owner in his work truck here:


This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 04-10-2015 9:16 PM ThinAirDesigns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 463 by ThinAirDesigns, posted 04-10-2015 11:07 PM Capt Stormfield has responded

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 247
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 460 of 483 (755714)
04-10-2015 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by OS
04-10-2015 9:47 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Have you been shopping at Non Sequiturs-R-Us?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 9:47 PM OS has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11099
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 461 of 483 (755716)
04-10-2015 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by OS
04-10-2015 9:47 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Tree rings are not all produced one per year;

You know that some are though, right?

Check out this animation (click me) on how tree rings grow annually.

Its basically a video version of this:

click to enlarge

Those came from a slide from a lecture from UC Davis.

quote:
Tree rings are concentric rings of secondary xylem and indicate annual growth layers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 9:47 PM OS has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3404
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 462 of 483 (755719)
04-10-2015 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by OS
04-10-2015 9:47 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Tree rings are not all produced one per year; and they aren't very distinct in small trees.

No one cares if "not all produced one per year" since there are quite a few well known, well studied species that do. No one cares that "they aren't very distinct in small trees," since small trees are not used in the calibration protocols.

Tree ring dating does not improve radiocarbon dating, and the data prove it.

Except that it indeed does improve the dating and the data actually do show it to be fact.

use

facts

data

Anything else you would like to be wrong about?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 9:47 PM OS has not yet responded

  
ThinAirDesigns
Member
Posts: 558
Joined: 02-12-2015


Message 463 of 483 (755723)
04-10-2015 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 459 by Capt Stormfield
04-10-2015 9:48 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Wow, as a timber cruiser in Idaho/Montana in the late '70s, that Erickson sure brought back memories.

Thanks.

JB


This message is a reply to:
 Message 459 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-10-2015 9:48 PM Capt Stormfield has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 467 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-11-2015 7:17 AM ThinAirDesigns has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5529
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 464 of 483 (755726)
04-10-2015 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by OS
04-10-2015 9:47 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
It's a myth. Tree ring dating does not improve radiocarbon dating, and the data prove it. Tree rings are not all produced one per year; and they aren't very distinct in small trees. It's NUTBALL JUNK.

It is obvious radiocarbon dating is not based on it.

Your ignorance concerning radiocarbon dating is exceeded only by your zeal in trying to discredit the technique.

Please tell us, how many radiocarbon samples you have submitted for analysis? (I have submitted somewhere over 650.)

Also, please tell us the source of your vast knowledge of the subject. (I have lectured extensively on the subject and authored a monograph on it as well. And was a while back on the advisory board of a radiocarbon laboratory.)

"The data prove it?" Please advise us, in detail, what that data might be. And please address, while you are at it, the conciliance between known historical dates and calibrated radiocarbon dates. By the way, those calibrated radiocarbon dates are obtained by using a calibration curve based on tree-rings (from several locations), corals, glacial carves, ice cores, deep lake cores, and other annular data. Please explain to us why all of them agree, and why you think all of them are wrong (maybe some creationist website told you so?).

What your posts show is that you really know nothing about the subject, but most likely, out of religious zeal, you are attempting to discredit it anyway. Your efforts would be a lot more effective if you knew something about what you were debating. Otherwise you just look pretty silly.


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

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by OS, posted 04-10-2015 9:47 PM OS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 465 by OS, posted 04-11-2015 1:12 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
OS
Member (Idle past 588 days)
Posts: 67
Joined: 06-22-2014


Message 465 of 483 (755732)
04-11-2015 1:12 AM
Reply to: Message 464 by Coyote
04-10-2015 11:25 PM


Re: OS and tree rings
Coyote writes:

Your ignorance concerning radiocarbon dating is exceeded only by your zeal in trying to discredit the technique.


You know what they say about the words assume and assumptions.

Edited by OS, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 464 by Coyote, posted 04-10-2015 11:25 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 466 by NoNukes, posted 04-11-2015 2:18 AM OS has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
282930
31
3233Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017