MEASURABLE 14C IN FOSSILIZED ORGANIC MATERIALS: CONFIRMING THE YOUNG EARTH CREATION-FLOOD MODEL

http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf ^

[fishtank]

PDF file.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

I think I've seen this before. The authors neglected to describe what they were calling "fossilized organic material" and then measured C14 from rocks.

They also didn't address the effect of assuming changes in radioactive decay rates over time that their theory requires.

[HamiltonJay]

Why is it the people who attack C14 dating as flawed, have no problem using it to try to suppor their own theories?

[Blood of Tyrants]

I'm not talking about quasars and pulsars and such that emit radio waves but stars that emit visible light.

[Right Wing Professor]

It is known widely that deep coal deposits contain large amounts of C14. And it has been known for some time.

This is an unsubstantiated assertion. Please back it up. Since it's 'widely known', providing some indepedent corroboration should be easy.

The issue is that no amount of facts can be allowed to get in the way of liberal/atheistic postulations and theorizing

I am neither a liberal not an atheist, and resent the ad hominem attack

You want to argue that things don't get peer reviewed or published, yet it is minds like yours who stop scientific studies such as this from being peer reviewed and published because the facts are inconvenient.

Previous papers from Dr. Humphreys, one of which I critiqued in detail some months ago, were shoddy in methodology and data analysis; and needed to assume physical impossibilities in order to make them work. Almost evryone I know who does substandard work blames his rejection on 'ideology', when it's just bad science.

[Hegemony Cricket]

"I'm told that the Vogons don't hold with the Young Earth Theory. "

Actually, they just consider it to be highly improbable.

[Right Wing Professor]

This quote was posted on another thread; its reposting here seems to be an attempt to disrupt. In other words, it's a troll.

[Con X-Poser]

Not trying to talk you out of salvation, but if you don't believe the Bible, I don't know what kind of salvation you have:

John 5:46-47 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

However, I have no problem with your not putting the cart before the horse, BUT, those questions DO come up when witnessing to the lost, and when they do, they deserve to be scripturally answered, not ignored or covered up.

The Bible presents God as the Creator and Judge before it presents Him as Saviour. If He is not Creator and Judge, there is no need for a Saviour.

I believe losing that foundation is why fewer get saved today, and many that do make professions of faith, seem very shallow or false. They soon realize they are believing in a Jesus who supports all those things they were taught were myths - and if they did truly get saved, their growth wil be severely retarded until the accept the verse I posted above. And maybe, as we see happening in universities often, they will reject the faith that they professed.

[Right Wing Professor]

I followed some links in Talkorigins.org and found that there is significant research being done to try to account for "anomalous" quantities of C14 being found in coal deposits

Please post the citations or links.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Radiation and other mutagens have never shown to cause postive mutations. Scientists have raised literally thousands of generations of fruit flies in labs and have subjected them to every type of mutagenic compound or ray known and have yet to produce a BETTER fruit fly. Also, every cell contains an elaborate method of making sure that it's DNA does NOT change. It is the change and breakdown of our DNA that causes aging and many types of disease.

[f.Christian]

another thread ...



Danger ... troll - CONTROL trap hole freaks --- ahead !

I had the cure - vaccine for the uri geller science virus a long time ago --- I'm immune now !

[WestPacSailor]

I'm a firm believer in the Big Bang theory. God spoke, and BANG! there it was.

[IpaqMan]

Here is the talkorigins.org link about the C14 in coal research.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/c14.html

[Right Wing Professor]

I suggest you take another look at the agreement you signed onto no more than 3 days ago.

[50sDad]

Not trying to talk you out of salvation, but if you don't believe the Bible, I don't know what kind of salvation you have.

A fully grounded one that thanks Christ for the rock it is built upon. The fact that I take a long view of Creation does not threaten that salvation, and as I have said, Christ will explain the intricacies of where I am wrong in the Hereafter, which thankfully is no way threatened by the fact that I view a Long Miracle through the parable of a Short One.

Praytell, Christ said that "I am the door". What kind of hinges does He have?

[Dataman]

No, I don't intend to waste my time on it. The earth is old -- very old -- and no amount of pseudo-science will change that.

Los Alamos scientists are pseudo scientists? Ok.

[Doctor Stochastic]

One effect would be the distortion of the Po halos in rocks. Similarly for other decay events. Of course, the heat given off by more active decay would be obvious.

[f.Christian]

One man's troll is another man's treasure ... some people pitch junk and other's can't stop their rubbish picking troll routines --- I thought troll trashing was legal now !

[Dataman]

Stating the obvious; not peer reviewed, not published, chances are they're seeing contamination by modern 14C.

Right. Carbon 14 measurements are incorrect unless they support the presuppositions of evos. That's scientific!

[xzins]

Nope, but it makes your earlier refusal palatable.

[Right Wing Professor]

Thanks for the link.

The 14C levels they're referring to are extremely low. 10^-13, the highest level in 'ancient' material they cite, corresponds to about 0.25% of the ambient, steady state value, and would correspond to a carbon date of around 34,000 years. That is far older than permitted by young-earth creationism.

The link suggests that these very low levels are produced by in situ transmutation by radioactive nuclides. Any production of ¹⁴C deep in the earth would of course result in a spuriously young date, probably in the range of 50K -100K years.