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.

[ConservativeMan55]

what? Is this series?

[dead]

(arms in the air, just reaching the top of the rollercoaster)

Here we go! Whee!

[fishtank]

Have you read the article?

[Mr. Bird]

I'm here to set the record straight: man first trod upon the Earth in the Sumerian region, having just been dropped off by a spaceship. A quite lovely one, in fact.

[Bikers4Bush]

Silver, with fins.

[wysiwyg]

CONFIRMING THE YOUNG EARTH CREATION-FLOOD MODEL

Right... Also, the earth is flat and astronauts never went to the moon.

[Mr. Bird]

Yes! And the fins were hugh.

[fishtank]

Have you read the article?

[ThinkPlease]

Here's something for y'all.

[ken5050]

Sign up for the remedial course in headline writing given by Jason Blair

[Blood of Tyrants]

To those who refuse to believe, no amount of evidence is neccessary.

[Blood of Tyrants]

I meant, To those who refuse to believe, no amount of evidence is ADEQUATE. Doh!

[wysiwyg]

Have you read the article?

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.

[Izzy Dunne]

man first trod upon the Earth in the Sumerian region, having just been dropped off by a spaceship.

That was Al Gore, wasn't it?

[savedbygrace]

And here I thought is was the Byrds that recorded "Mr. Spaceman", not the Birds.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Right Wing Professor]

These guys have no shame. Humphreys, in an article posted a few weeks ago, claimed 'accelerated nuclear decay' to explain the radiopotassium dates of ancient rocks. OK; however, if accelerated nuclear decay happened, how come the 14C in the present samples didn't decay?

Stating the obvious; not peer reviewed, not published, chances are they're seeing contamination by modern 14C.

[headsonpikes]

Everyone's got to believe in something; I do believe I'll have another drink.

[wysiwyg]

That was Al Gore, wasn't it?

Did he invent Carbon 14?

[laker_dad]

14C?? Skinny with a good handfull...

[savedbygrace]

In the following Abstract from the PDF, the 14 in 14C and the -14 in 7.3 X 10-14 should be read as superscripts. I can't find my HTML code book. LOL.

ABSTRACT

Given the short 14C half-life of 5730 years, organic materials purportedly older than 250,000 years, corresponding to 43.6 half-lives, should contain absolutely no detectable 14C. (One gram of modern carbon contains about 6 x 1010 14C atoms, and 43.6 half-lives should reduce that number by a factor of 7.3 x 10-14.) An astonishing discovery made over the past twenty years is that, almost without exception, when tested by highly sensitive accelerator mass spectrometer (AMS) methods, organic samples from every portion of the Phanerozoic record show detectable amounts of 14C! 14C/C ratios from all but the youngest Phanerozoic samples appear to be clustered in the range 0.1-0.5 pmc (percent modern carbon), regardless of geological ‘age.’ A straightforward conclusion that can be drawn from these observations is that all but the very youngest Phanerozoic organic material was buried contemporaneously much less than 250,000 years ago. This is consistent with the Biblical account of a global Flood that destroyed most of the air-breathing life on the planet in a single brief cataclysm only a few thousand years ago.

[SengirV]

Yep, now I believe. God created us and put fossils in the ground to make us think that the Earth was far older than it is. God then make the vast universe(billions of light year wide) and then fooled us by putting photons of light from object MANY(< 15) billions of light years away 999999999999999999999/1000000000000000000000ths the way from these objects to earth so it would only make it seem that the universe is really that old(Everything was created in 6 days, right?). etc....

I've got a bridge in Brooklyn that I would like to sell. You interested?

[IpaqMan]

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. The theories range from fungi to local radioactive deposits. The possibility of contamination was not raised.

[sleepy_hollow]

This is extremely interesting. Even if you are not a creationist, as I readily admit I am, you should at least read the abstract. Bottom line is there is evidence to suggest that carbon dating (done using Carbon 14) casts doubt on the conventionally accepted dates for certain fossils. So much so, in fact, that a pattern appears to emerge that indicates a whole lot of stuff was snuffed out at the same time. Certainly should give one pause to eflect eiethre on the theories or on the dating methods at least. Please recall that dating of fossils is often done by reference to an assumed model for where the fossils should be found (it is circular logic, but that's just slant-foreheaded dumb old creationist me speaking).

By the way I work with some of the country's premier scientists and thinkers and have been doing so for over a 2 decades. I can assure you that these folks definitely put their pants on the same way non-scientists do. They are fallible, opinionated and prejudiced just like the est of us. Their profession does not exempt them from the human race.

[VadeRetro]

(One gram of modern carbon contains about 6 x 10 ^{10 14} C atoms, and 43.6 half-lives should reduce that number by a factor of 7.3 x 10 ^-14 .)

It's a quibble, but that's a very tiny reduction factor where a great one is needed. (You just cut the original amount of C-14 in half 43 times.) I would expect a scientific paper to be proofread.

... organic samples from every portion of the Phanerozoic record show detectable amounts of C! 14 C/C ratios from all but the youngest Phanerozoic samples appear to be clustered in the range 0.1-0.5 pmc (percent modern carbon), regardless of geological ‘age.’

The short answer to what is going on here is "Abuse the instrument, measure noise." There's a preferred instrument for every date range, one for which the element half-life makes sense. C-14 is only useful for very recent objects because of the short half-life. With any physical measurement, as the thing being measured shrinks, the spike of signal tends to go down not to zero but into a fringe of noise. These guys appear to be lawyering on the noise.

[sleepy_hollow]

Perhaps it is not God who has fooled us, but we who have fooled ourselves.

[The Iguana]

Another 3,000 post thread in the making.

[fishtank]

Do you have the education required to evaluate and understand the article?

[fishtank]

No one has been able to remove the "contamination"?

[fishtank]

Gravitational time dilation.

Your homework assignment:

Read "Starlight and Time" by Russell Humphreys, Ph.D. at Sandia National Labs (retired)

[fishtank]

What local radioactive decay chain allows for greater than normal C-14 levels?

[fishtank]

What local radioactive decay chain allows for greater than normal C-14 levels?

[50sDad]

What I tell my Creationist Friends...

I am a Scientific Christian (but not a Christian Scientist! ;) I believe that God created Man through a miracle. Some claim this was a quick one that ancient Heberews could understand, but I personally lean towards a long term one that science can understand. Although that is my belief, God will explain the correct answer to me in the afterlife, and probably then it will no longer be important to me.

However, some of my zealous, enthusiastic Christian brothers make Creation a tenent of the Faith that outstrips and replaces the real center of our Salvation, the personal sacrifice of Jesus Christ to erase our sins (if we come to Him and ask, of course.) With bulldog like intensity, they will bring it up at every opportunity. I believe this to be a liability, and I will now submit why:

We were counseled by one of the Apostles to "not eat meat offered before idols." He noted that while everything is made clean before God, not all things are good, and that to some Hebrews, to do this would be offensive. To Christians made clean, the act was not forbidden. But the very fact that it was offensive to the Hebrews actually harmed the witness for Christ, for those Jews could scoff at the Christians, and use the action to discount the witness for Christ.

I have a very Intelligent, Scientific Friend from college, and I would like him to understand that Christ died for him. Now, the free sacrifice by God Almighty might be, given the right conditions in my friend's life, something he could get his busy brain around. However, I have another friend, a dyed in the wool Creationist, who would go to this very Scientific Fellow, and insist:
"Hey! Everything you know is wrong! Carbon dating, atomic decay, silt, the rate hydrogen burns at, migration patterns, everything! Wrong, wrongo, wrongiest! Oh, and by the way, Christ died for your sins."

To this Scientific Friend, any creedece that the Salvation of Jesus Christ may have possibly had is now out the window. What he has experienced is not a loving explaination that there is sin in his live that God can remove, but an attack on all the facts that he knows are true. This scientific fellow is now convinced that Christians are deluded people who don't understand Science, and whatever "that spiritual thing" is that they believe can be discounted.

In summation, My Perception is that the Universe is probably older than some other people's by a factor of about a billion. It is no less aweinspiring or astounding for the fact that God took a lot longer crafting it. I may be wrong. God will straighten me out in the Debriefing. But beating a Cold, Rational, Scientific Person over the head with the literal interpritation of Flood and Pre-Flood Creation will place a unneeded barrier between them and Jesus Christ. And that is something I don't want to do. Our witness to the unchurched, to the Lost, to the sheep wandering outside of Christ's fold, should be about the Agape love that Christ has for them, personally, and the Salvation change that can make them new and better people. Beating the Creationist horse can weaken that witness among scientific-minded people.

(And boy, you should have seen the face of this Intelligent Fellow the night my wife tried to tell him that "everybody knows a Ouija board WON'T BURN!")

[trebb]

And God said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT." But, the Dims shut their eyes tight because too much light exposes the truth and they would have none of it.

[narby]

No one has been able to remove the "contamination"?

Should read: No one has been able to remove the "noise".

Every instrument I've ever seen has a noise level. This will be grabbed by the creationists to "prove" that everything ever done by scientists is wrong (ignoring, of course, that scientists designed the instrument the creationists are relying on in the first place).

[GluteusMax]

ping

[50sDad]

God created us and put fossils in the ground to make us think that the Earth was far older than it is.

Any first-year Creationist student would tell you that it is not in God's nature to lie, and God's nature never changes!

Clearly, it was the Devil who put all the fossils in the ground.

I know people who will tell you, straight-faced, that all UFO sightings and contacts are devil-orchestrated illusions designed to make us falsely believe that there is life outside of Earth. (I imagine if you asked further, they would ascribe to the theory that the Earth is at the center of several layers of glass globes with tiny lights in them and the planets and sun rotate around it. Hey, the idea worked fine for two thousand years, no need to change it!)

[bondserv]

Yep, now I believe. God created us and put fossils in the ground to make us think that the Earth was far older than it is. God then make the vast universe(billions of light year wide) and then fooled us by putting photons of light from object MANY(< 15) billions of light years away 999999999999999999999/1000000000000000000000ths the way from these objects to earth so it would only make it seem that the universe is really that old(Everything was created in 6 days, right?).

Like He said:

1. I put the fossils in the ground via a flood.

2. I spread the universe out like a scroll.

Being that God claims creative prowess over the entire universe, it wouldn't be hard for Him to spread light across vast reaches of space.

[Myrnick]

AMEN!!!

[50sDad]

Do you have the education required to evaluate and understand the article?

Youch, brother. The obivious rejoiner would be "do you have the education required to promote it?" No offense intended, but the above is a bad debating tactic, not greatly above the schoolyard "Oh yeah, well your're STOOPID!"

[narby]

Bravo, bravo! Dady'o!

I've been trying to make the point that creationist dogma is a bad thing for believers for a long time on this forum. You've made the best argument that I've seen along that line.

Can I keep a reference to your post for later use?

Great post! Really Great!

[fishtank]

"The short answer to what is going on here is "Abuse the instrument, measure noise." There's a preferred instrument for every date range, one for which the element half-life makes sense. C-14 is only useful for very recent objects because of the short half-life. With any physical measurement, as the thing being measured shrinks, the spike of signal tends to go down not to zero but into a fringe of noise. These guys appear to be lawyering on the noise."

No. The lower limit of detection (LLD) for the AMS instrument is 0.002 pmc (percent of the modern ratio of C-14). In Figure 3 in their paper, the mean pmc for 10 samples of coal was pmc = 0.247, which is about two orders of magnitude higher than the pmc.

No, they are not "measuring noise".

I just wrote a document dealing with LLD determination for radioactive dose measurements. (I am the lead researcher on a new instrument.) They are not measuring noise.

The tables have turned. The statues are falling. Many scientists are being exposed as being not only fallible but biased, deceiving and dishonest on the question of evolution.

[Quix]

Obviously you were there in the beginning and can reliably affirm such.

---

Who knows?

---

My exceedingly brilliant Mormon dissertation chairman once wisely commented (when I asked him how he handled the many changes to the supposedly unchanged Book of Mormon):

LIFE IS SO COMPLEX, JUST ABOUT ANY COCKAMAYMEE EXPLANATION WILL DO.

---

We are finite critters.

Even our "recorded history" may well fail to record plenty of critical facts.

The "fossile record" may well fail to have recorded plenty of critical facts.

Our understanding of "physics" is turned this way and that and sometimes on it's head with recent discoveries. We haven't the DISTANCE in time nor geography to pontificate TRULY AUTHORITATIVELY about much of anything.

PERHAPS ALL THIS IS some kind of super virtual reality in God's comptuer. How could we know?

A variety of explanations are possible.

I'm skeptical about the earth being as young as 6,000-10,000 years old!!! Goodness, there are evidently Chinese villages from 7,000 years ago.

But neither am I convinced that the dating methods and postulations of the evolutionists are 100.0000% correct either.

THERE ARE TOO MANY UNKNOWNS THAT WE HAVE RELATIVELY NO ACCESS TO IN TIME AND/OR DISTANCE to base any TOTALLY RELIABLE pontifications on.

We are silly critters. All sides will continue to pontificate.

And, eventually, God will show all sides to have been exceedingly and pathetically ignorant and arrogant.

[Quix]

Don't know.

Haven't examined any of his used toilet paper.

[xzins]

Have you ever posted an article that claimed the earth was old...very old?

[50sDad]

It also assumes that conditions at Earth surface have always been the same as they are now...what if we peiodically pass through belts of radiation in the galaxy that irridate our soil? What if these belts of radiation produce a much higher mutation rate? Earth is not a laboratory where you can keep all conditions the same and vary one, nor is there a control group. That's why there are so few "Laws" of science, and so very many "theories". (Cloaked Darwinists take note!)

[fishtank]

"do you have the education required to promote it?"

Yes, I do. I just don't think that a valid article should be dismissed with name calling by those who don't even understand the science behind it.

The schoolyard games are being played by the people who are calling names about the people who wrote the article.

[Quix]

When God

ROLLS BACK THE HEAVENS LIKE A SCROLL,

I expect a lot of gaping jaws.

And perhaps no small amount of mobbing the nearest rocks, crannies and holes to hide in.

[50sDad]

And God said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT."

And there was Big Bang, a first day...

[wysiwyg]

Um, no...should I have?