Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 0/368 Day: 0/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Carbon Dating DOESN'T work beyond 4500 years
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 765 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 5 of 108 (36974)
04-14-2003 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by booboocruise
04-14-2003 5:42 AM


When solar radiation strikes the earth's atmospher, it converts the stable carbon-12 (found in CO2) into radioactive Carbon-14.
You're a troll, trying to make the creationist camp look even worse, right?
14C is generated from, and decays back to, nitrogen 14. When you're headed backwards out of the starting gate, you're not going to win many races......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by booboocruise, posted 04-14-2003 5:42 AM booboocruise has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 765 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 10 of 108 (38277)
04-29-2003 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by booboocruise
04-28-2003 8:29 PM


Remember that there IS water found in space, and when water becomes subjected to colder temperatures as in the atmosphere, it becomes magnetic.
There is a little particle of truth to this. When you cool water below about 5 degrees C and pressurize it to above about 300,000 pounds per square inch pressure, you can form a solid known as ice-VIII ("ice-eight") which is weakly antiferromagnetic. Whether that means that the Earth's magnetic field will hold it up, I don't know; I do know that pressures of 300,000 psi are going to be very hard to come by in Earth orbit. Ordinary liquid water can be levitated by magnetic fields a few hundred thousand times as strong as the Earth's magnetic field, but it seems to me that a scenario with such a strong field might make it tricky for antedeluvian people, animals, and especially lakes and oceans, to stay in the places they want to be.
See http://www.sbu.ac.uk/water/index.html for a deeper treatment.
As to calibration of the 14C clock - go to Science | AAAS
and register - it's free. Use their search function to find the paper by Kitigawa and van der Plicht in volume 279, pages 1187-1190, from 1998. Read it, for free, and find out about the 45,000 layers they counted in Japanese lake bottom sediments, and the 250 14C dates they got on leaves and insect parts out of those layets. Read about how these correlate with tree rings from Germany, ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica, uranium dates of coral in Indonesia and the Bahamas......
Then get back to me on the "inaccuracy" of carbon-14 dating.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by booboocruise, posted 04-28-2003 8:29 PM booboocruise has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 765 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 11 of 108 (38279)
04-29-2003 12:21 AM


By the way, BBC: have you been reading Walt Brown's stuff?

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 765 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 31 of 108 (38587)
05-01-2003 10:27 AM


Booboo: My post 10, this thread. The link to sciencemag.org. Please read it. Tell me how to get 45,000 layers, of the kind observed to form yearly, in 5000 years. Tell me why 250 14C dates line up smoothly with the dates from counting layers. Tell me why varves in Japan would correlate closely with tree rings in Germany.
Read the link. Please.

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 765 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 99 of 108 (153465)
10-27-2004 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by JESUS freak
10-27-2004 6:24 PM


Re: carbon dating obsolete
Hi, JF! Welcome to EvC!
All of your idiotic Darwinist debate is based around carbon dating.
Really! I never noticed that! As 14C is only good to about 50,000 years ago, and there are almost no fossils whatever that young, I'm a little surprised by that assertion.
You might want to look around the Dates and Dating forum here just a little before you post much more. I think you might find that Setterfield's views have been pretty seriously deflated already.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by JESUS freak, posted 10-27-2004 6:24 PM JESUS freak has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Wounded King, posted 10-27-2004 7:02 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024