Carbon Dating

[Just_me_Mike]

So I have been studying this topic, and have concluded that carbon dating is a sham, at lesat being used for anything older than 50,000 years. Right now it is the number one way we date things, but it can never really be trusted.
What I know is this:
There is a section in the grand canyon that has been used as the holy grail of carbon dating because we can see so many layers.
So I thought wow, this must be irrefutable, so I spent days studying the matter, to come across a unique study.
The study was to take a control, which was rock and sediment from a known volcano in Hawaii that erupted in the 1970's. They would send this material to independent labs around the world.
The results were nuts. Each lab had the material dated over 1 millions years ago, and some as far back as 100 millions years ago.
At that point I verified the legitamcy of the study and found it was indeed legit.

So I had to conclude while there is a place for carbon dating, it is no where reliable enough to try and date things from before 50,000 years. But, of course any person schooled any carbon dating will tell you this is self evident. It is only reliable up 50,000 years.

Anyway, so, naturally I am looking into this because I want to learn the truth about dinosaurs. Could they have lived with humans? Because if so, this blows away many teachings about millions of years ago.

The fact is there isn't any evidence other than carbon dating, and the layers found in rock that help us know when the dinosaurs actually lived.

I later learned something else I found interesting. In china we have dated pictures of drawings that depict dionsaurs well older than we discovered fossils. If in fact dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, then how were the chinese able to draw pictures of them? Maybe they just made them up, I dunno. But seeing that fossils are a recent discovery (relatively speaking), these drawing far out date fossil finding, by which we draw things in our day.

Anyway I just found it interesting to see how science is awesome, but in some cases full of holes that we need to consider.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

How is this a religious debate?

 

[Tristesse]

How is this a religious debate?

Because, if you except anything science has to offer, you can't be religious.

 

[Zephyr]

How is this a religious debate?

YECs

 

[linwood]

This should be moved to the science forum

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

So I have been studying this topic, and have concluded that carbon dating is a sham, at lesat being used for anything older than 50,000 years.

The sham is the implication that it's relied upon for dates older than 50,000 years. Note, however ...

Thus, the characteristics of the underground laboratory of Gran Sasso make it possible to perform high precision radiocarbon measurements, to improve fM by 60% and to extend for these idealized samples the dating limit from 58,000 BP to 62,000 BP (5 mL, 3 days counting). However, experiments on real material have emphasized that the problems in extending the limit of detection back in time, have much more to do with benzene synthesis and contaminants introduced through lithium, surface reaction catalysts and impurities than the counter background level (Radnell and Muller 1980; Lowe 1989; McCormac et al. 1993). [source]​

 

[Just_me_Mike]

This is about religion because, my point is that dinosaurs were around in the flood. And that type of world wide event could very easily packed dinosaurs into the earth and changed the very fabric of hour sediment make up. Once we have a better understanding of this we can see how accurate the bible is. Trying to look at something scientifically helps a lot.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

This is about religion because, my point is that dinosaurs were around in the flood. And that type of world wide event could very easily packed dinosaurs into the earth and changed the very fabric of hour sediment make up. Once we have a better understanding of this we can see how accurate the bible is. Trying to look at something scientifically helps a lot.

Congratulations on the most unintentionally hilarious post of the week.

 

[Tristesse]

This is about religion because, my point is that dinosaurs were around in the flood. And that type of world wide event could very easily packed dinosaurs into the earth and changed the very fabric of hour sediment make up. Once we have a better understanding of this we can see how accurate the bible is. Trying to look at something scientifically helps a lot.

oh your god, your a young earth creationist aren't you? It all makes sense now.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

How is this a religious debate?

Because it will take a miracle to get our apologist to annotate his diatribe with actual references.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is about religion because, my point is that dinosaurs were around in the flood. And that type of world wide event could very easily packed dinosaurs into the earth and changed the very fabric of hour sediment make up.

How?

Please keep in mind that you're talking to someone who has a degree in civil engineering, has taken graduate-level courses in geotechnical engineering, and generally has a good idea of how to examine sediments to get an idea of their history, so no need to dumb your explanation down or use small words.

Tell us what you think occurred, and then we can see if this is borne out by the evidence.

 

[Valjean]

So I have been studying this topic, and have concluded that carbon dating is a sham, at lesat being used for anything older than 50,000 years. Right now it is the number one way we date things, but it can never really be trusted.
What I know is this:
There is a section in the grand canyon that has been used as the holy grail of carbon dating because we can see so many layers.
So I thought wow, this must be irrefutable, so I spent days studying the matter, to come across a unique study.
The study was to take a control, which was rock and sediment from a known volcano in Hawaii that erupted in the 1970's. They would send this material to independent labs around the world.
The results were nuts. Each lab had the material dated over 1 millions years ago, and some as far back as 100 millions years ago.
At that point I verified the legitamcy of the study and found it was indeed legit.

So I had to conclude while there is a place for carbon dating, it is no where reliable enough to try and date things from before 50,000 years. But, of course any person schooled any carbon dating will tell you this is self evident. It is only reliable up 50,000 years.

Anyway, so, naturally I am looking into this because I want to learn the truth about dinosaurs. Could they have lived with humans? Because if so, this blows away many teachings about millions of years ago.

The fact is there isn't any evidence other than carbon dating, and the layers found in rock that help us know when the dinosaurs actually lived.

I later learned something else I found interesting. In china we have dated pictures of drawings that depict dionsaurs well older than we discovered fossils. If in fact dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, then how were the chinese able to draw pictures of them? Maybe they just made them up, I dunno. But seeing that fossils are a recent discovery (relatively speaking), these drawing far out date fossil finding, by which we draw things in our day.

Anyway I just found it interesting to see how science is awesome, but in some cases full of holes that we need to consider.

What on earth are you going on about, itwillend? Your post makes no sense. You clearly didn't research your material on carbon dating, and you don't even mention the dating methods that would be applicable to your dinosaur question.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I'll assume that you actually are abysmally ignorant about this whole subject and are not a troll:

What's this about the Grand Canyon? What does it have to do with Carbon dating? What does seeing so many layers have to do with carbon dating. These layers are way too old to carbon date, even if they did contain carbon.

What's this Hawiian volcano study? No-one would try to carbon date an igneous rock!

What does carbon dating have to do with dinosaurs? No-one uses this to date dinosaurs. And as far as ancient Chinese pictures go, people have been drawing fantastic pictures of all sorts of things for as long as people drew -- and I don't recall any dinos at Lascaux, either.

 

[tumbleweed41]

So I have been studying this topic, and have concluded that carbon dating is a sham, at lesat being used for anything older than 50,000 years. Right now it is the number one way we date things, but it can never really be trusted.
What I know is this:
There is a section in the grand canyon that has been used as the holy grail of carbon dating because we can see so many layers.
So I thought wow, this must be irrefutable, so I spent days studying the matter, to come across a unique study.
The study was to take a control, which was rock and sediment from a known volcano in Hawaii that erupted in the 1970's. They would send this material to independent labs around the world.
The results were nuts. Each lab had the material dated over 1 millions years ago, and some as far back as 100 millions years ago.
At that point I verified the legitamcy of the study and found it was indeed legit.

So I had to conclude while there is a place for carbon dating, it is no where reliable enough to try and date things from before 50,000 years. But, of course any person schooled any carbon dating will tell you this is self evident. It is only reliable up 50,000 years.

Anyway, so, naturally I am looking into this because I want to learn the truth about dinosaurs. Could they have lived with humans? Because if so, this blows away many teachings about millions of years ago.

The fact is there isn't any evidence other than carbon dating, and the layers found in rock that help us know when the dinosaurs actually lived.

I later learned something else I found interesting. In china we have dated pictures of drawings that depict dionsaurs well older than we discovered fossils. If in fact dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, then how were the chinese able to draw pictures of them? Maybe they just made them up, I dunno. But seeing that fossils are a recent discovery (relatively speaking), these drawing far out date fossil finding, by which we draw things in our day.

Anyway I just found it interesting to see how science is awesome, but in some cases full of holes that we need to consider.

You have been studying this topic?
I doubt that, since C14 dating is applicable only to matter that was once living, and presumed to be in equilibrium with the atmosphere. Taking in CO2 from the air for photosynthesis. (volcanic rock?)

And it is well known among C14 experts that the range is only about 50,000 yrs, unless one uses accelerated C14 dating, which has been show to reach back about 100,000 yrs. So where is the sham? Allow me to illustrate.

C14 dating has nothing to do with rock strata in the Grand Canyon. C14 uses the known radio isotope half life of C14 to determine age, it has never been connected to geological strata.

However, rock strata is used for dating fossils found in those strata, as geologists (Not radiologists specializing in C14) are able to determine the age of each layer of strata by its location and composite makeup.

Your 1970s volcanic rock is a sham, as C14 dating would be useless on a piece of molten rock that has never seen the light of day, nor would it contain the organic materials to base a C14 date on.

Sorry, you get an F in this subject.

 

[Valjean]

This is about religion because, my point is that dinosaurs were around in the flood. And that type of world wide event could very easily packed dinosaurs into the earth and changed the very fabric of hour sediment make up. Once we have a better understanding of this we can see how accurate the bible is. Trying to look at something scientifically helps a lot.

What evidence do you have for this "flood?"

 

[Twilight Hue]

So I have been studying this topic, and have concluded that carbon dating is a sham, at lesat being used for anything older than 50,000 years. Right now it is the number one way we date things, but it can never really be trusted.
What I know is this:
There is a section in the grand canyon that has been used as the holy grail of carbon dating because we can see so many layers.
So I thought wow, this must be irrefutable, so I spent days studying the matter, to come across a unique study.
The study was to take a control, which was rock and sediment from a known volcano in Hawaii that erupted in the 1970's. They would send this material to independent labs around the world.
The results were nuts. Each lab had the material dated over 1 millions years ago, and some as far back as 100 millions years ago.
At that point I verified the legitamcy of the study and found it was indeed legit.

So I had to conclude while there is a place for carbon dating, it is no where reliable enough to try and date things from before 50,000 years. But, of course any person schooled any carbon dating will tell you this is self evident. It is only reliable up 50,000 years.

Anyway, so, naturally I am looking into this because I want to learn the truth about dinosaurs. Could they have lived with humans? Because if so, this blows away many teachings about millions of years ago.

The fact is there isn't any evidence other than carbon dating, and the layers found in rock that help us know when the dinosaurs actually lived.

I later learned something else I found interesting. In china we have dated pictures of drawings that depict dionsaurs well older than we discovered fossils. If in fact dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, then how were the chinese able to draw pictures of them? Maybe they just made them up, I dunno. But seeing that fossils are a recent discovery (relatively speaking), these drawing far out date fossil finding, by which we draw things in our day.

Anyway I just found it interesting to see how science is awesome, but in some cases full of holes that we need to consider.

To expand on what Tumbleweed correctly puts out, there definitely exists a more precise method of carbon dating called AMS (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) which requires less carbon and can test samples far smaller than the standard c14 method, and using an accelerator-based mass spectrometer, they can count all the C14 atoms as opposed to the decaying ones from the c14 method making this much more accurate.

Science does not just rely solely on Carbon methods to determine dates. You might want to check out other methods such as potassium-argon dating, Racemization dating, Luminescence dating, and archaeomagnetic dating just to name a few.

Interesting stuff and science always gets better, not worse with each new discovery and development of better methods.

-NM-

 

[Tristesse]

What evidence do you have for this "flood?"

He's a literalist of the bible, from what I've gathered. So, your not going to get evidence, your going to get some verses from the bible and whatnot.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Because it will take a miracle to get our apologist to annotate his diatribe with actual references.

I have no problem gicing references, the problem is getting anyone to read them.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I have no problem gicing references, the problem is getting anyone to read them.

I have yet to see you gice a single reference.

 

[Zephyr]

I have PROOF that the earth was created by aliens after smoking a little too much space-weed. I'd give some references, but it's not like anybody would read them.

 

[Azakel]

Congratulations on the most unintentionally hilarious post of the week.

Give it time, it's only Wednesday. He might top him self by Friday.