Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1

You better find your "medical pdf" as I have never heard of such an effect.Perhaps you are thinking of isotopic fractionation?Added by edit: And you are correct, C14 dating does not prove the age of the earth. It goes back some 50,000 years. The age of the earth is some 4.52 billion years, and is measured with other tools.Edited by Coyote, : Added comment

It doesn't change the isotope, but it does expel it. Thus it has a body half life. I know by Isotopic Labeling. Carbon-14 is put into the body and used with an MRI.Edited by OS, : No reason given.

"It doesn't change the isotope, but it does expel it. Thus it has a body half life. I know by Isotopic Labeling."And this is something applied to living individuals?

How would a human body expel carbon-14, exactly? Yes, we expel carbon with every breath, but I'm going to hazard a guess that C-14 leaves slower than C-12. It's called an isotope effect. Heavier is typically slower - or that's how it has worked for me.Quit making shit up, OS. It clogs bandwidth.

I might be thinking fractionalization. I know Carbon-14 doesn't like water either.

Might you be thinking of the reservoir effect?When are you going to realize that some of us know far more about this than you do?

Carbon-14, or carbon-12 or carbon-13, are all about equally hydrophobic if they are in the form of graphite, for one example. All three are very fond of water if they are in a compound that is appropriate for human metabolism, like maybe glucose or carbon dioxide.Go read the first forty posts of this thread, OS.Oh, added by edit: carbon-11 is sometimes used in PET scans. No radioisotopes are needed in MRI.Edited by Coragyps, : No reason given.

This conversation reminds me of a friend who wanted to know if he could still have children since his watch had tritium tubes for night luminescence. I told him the watch should be okay but the fact he was butt fuggly and dumb as a rock might be a handicap. So he sold the watch and bought hair gel.

Coyote, I don't see how he could have gotten this stuff from creationist websites except by misreading them. He is even further from the mark than all but the silliest of the Creationist web sites. In fact OS is just about the one of those rare people who might actually learn something about radiometric dating by visiting AIG or ICR.

The human body does not distinguish between C-14 and C-12. Processes which expel one, expel the other. Dead things, in general, don't have significant biological processes.

Only in that, it doesn't seem to get rid of Carbon-14; I am glad I can't find that PDF, because it makes arguing how it is poisonous easier.I have yet to acknowledge accurately dated corpses though. Is it harder to gauge the carbon level of a once live thing? Then there is the issue of 12,000 years and everything has decayed. Exponential decay exaggerates a lot of ages. Linear decay would be a better approach.

I'll tell the isotopes they're decaying wrong. They'll listen to me.

Not even in that respect. Chemically, isotopes are identical.But you are glad you cannot find your reference? I guess that does free you up a bit when you want to take nonsense positions. That does it. Surely you are a Poe.

Now you have gone from sublimely ridiculous to absurd. Don't worry ... reality will wait for you to catch up (if you are interested) ... and the objective empirical evidence won't change. Which is irrelevant to 14C dating. Which is more non-sense. Except that we KNOW that exponential decay matches the evidence and linear decay doesn't. This information is readily available if you want to learn.Just because you prefer a simple world doesn't make it so.... and I have to wonder at (a) your level of education (b) the source of your purported education -- home-school with ignorant parent/s or some really shoddy "christian" run sham?You are like a Faux Noise viewer -- someone that is not only not given proper information, but someone who has been given (or allowed to make up) completely wrong information as some pretense of education.What you "know" about 14C is dead wrong and what you "know" about tree rings is dead wrong. So wrong that being ignorant would be better. Like the guy at the firing range that shoots the wall behind him, you're aim is so bad you can't even hit your foot.So far you have made 24 posts on this thread, and every one of them has been a waste of time and bandwidth, completely devoid of any relevance to reality, and completely ignoring the evidence presented, you have been off topic from the start, and only good for amusement value.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : ..Edited by RAZD, : ...Edited by RAZD, : .

A common characteristic of nutjobs is not keeping their stories straight. Message 2: That's making a claim that it is possible.It isn't.