Skip to comments.Are dinosaurs fossils really that old? [vanity]
Posted on 10/28/2011 6:39:41 AM PDT by Ancient Drive
I read that carbon dating method is only accurate for up to 30,000 yrs. So how are scientists coming up with millions yrs. old fossils? For all we know dinosaurs died off not millions but 100's of thousands of yrs ago.
Only in a culture that had strong racial memories could something like the Flintstones become a hit show. Hanna-Barbera just cashed in on it.
He'd have been nuts to include those Velociraptors!
The dinosaurs were atheists and didn’t come to him.
Thought they were too big to fail.
“I am biased though, Im of the belief in the six day creation deal :)”
Too boring for God the Multiverse complete with billions of years for the local universe to be in existence is far more interesting.
When the Bible was given to a early agrarian society how would God explain, Quantum Chromodynamics, Genetics, and so on. When dealing with children tell then fairy tales they can relate to to give the lesson. Think Santa Claus....
“I am biased though, Im of the belief in the six day creation deal :)”
72 hours after creating a mountain range, the mountain appears to be hundreds of millions of years old even though it really is only 3 days old.
Interestingly, Allosaurs and Tyrannosaurs are separated more in time than Tyrannosaurs and humans. Allosaurs and Tyrannosaurs lived roughly 80 million years apart. T-Rexes and humans, ~64 million.
There are dozens of different isotopic and other dating methods, some of which, based on half life decay, are more accurate into the millions of years. A lot of ‘young earth’ sites like to blatantly confuse the reader by bringing up radiocarbon dating anytime radiometric dating is mentioned so they can say it isn’t accurate over 30K years (actually 60K but not the point here). Radiometric measurements can be accurate into the billions of years (in Uranium-Lead dating), Samarium-neodymium to about 20 million years, Potassium-argon at 1.3 billion years... etc.. and there are also
Don’t be deceived when some point out radiocarbon dating when talking about fossils. They are being purposefully deceptive.
It became a hit because it was a satire and parody of family sit-coms common in the 50s and 60s.
Don’t they age fossils by the strata they’re in?
This is a very deep subject.
I suggest you check out www.answersingenesis.com or www.icr.org
There are lots of info/points to a young earth (the idea of a young earth is usually linked with the veracity of dating methods).
I have several books that present the “other” side (i.e. the data they never tell you about that doe not agree with old earth). There is actually more data that points to a young earth than an old earth.
A lot of people think this is settled science, but it’s not. Neither is the method of the formation of the universe, the “particle” or physical method gravity uses, or where is the majority (apparently) of mass in the universe. (Dark Matter).
Of course, I will get deluged with “experts” who are confident they are right, but I want to point out that science texts older than a few years are outdated for a reason -— they “answers” keep changing (I mean, those “answers” that are not proven, are only theory). All the topics I have mentioned so far have THEORIES of formation, not facts. To be science we must
Note that topics like the distant age of the universe, formation, etc are therefore not open to “know” an answer, as they are neither observable nor repeatable.
Such topics ARE open to Theory. Unfortunately, modern science has devolved into a jobs/political program.
“Actually, photos. We use time-machines and then photograph the dinosaurs and write a time-date stamp on the negative.
You have to realize that when you go backwards in time you lose your digital processors and it’s all reactive silver plates from then on.
Fortunately dinos find silver distasteful so they keep their distance from us”
I love it.
A. 1645 Dutch records in Albany, NY and corresponding Iroquois oral tradition written down speak of giant pterodactyl-like birds swooping down along the Mohawk River in the early 1600`s and snatching women and children from the banks. With the advent of Dutch-supplied muskets to the Mohawks, these stories quickly disappeared.[2 separate sources for the same phenomenon.]
O’Callaghan, E.B., ed., ``History of New Netherland,`` 2 vols., New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1848; The Reprint Company, Spartanburg, SC, 1966
B. Late 1890`s Deseret News has a front-page photo of 2 prospectors standing over the carcass of a giant ``serpent-bird`` in the Mojave.
C.Two friends of mine, Native American mother and daughter, were terrorized by a giant pterodactyl-like bird in remote eastern Texas flying over them in the early 1980`s. [cf. newspaper reports of other sightings in Texas.]
you certainly would never see cave paintings of people chasing antelope with spears. Theyd all be of villages running in terror from Allosaurs and Tyrannosaurs.”
Well, maybe. But the interesting thing is that even if we did find such cave paintings, it would not be deemed evidence that men and dinos co-existed, because, as we all know.....that is impossible.
“Uranium-lead is one of the oldest and most refined of the radiometric dating schemes, with a routine age range of about 1 million years to over 4.5 billion years, and with routine precisions in the 0.1-1 percent range. The method relies on two separate decay chains, the uranium series from 238U to 206Pb, with a half-life of 4.47 billion years and the actinium series from 235U to 207Pb, with a half-life of 704 million years. These decay routes occur via a series of alpha (and beta) decays, in which 238U with daughter nuclides undergo eight total alpha and six beta decays whereas 235U with daughters only experience seven alpha and four beta decays.
The existence of two ‘parallel’ uranium-lead decay routes (238U to 206Pb and 235U to 207Pb) leads to multiple dating techniques within the overall U-Pb system. The term ‘U-Pb dating’ normally implies the coupled use of both decay schemes in the ‘concordia diagram’ (see below). However, use of a single decay scheme (usually 238U to 206Pb) leads to the U-Pb isochron dating method, analogous to the rubidium-strontium dating method. Finally, ages can also be determined from the U-Pb system by analysis of Pb isotope ratios alone. This is termed the lead-lead dating method. Clair Cameron Patterson, an American geochemist who pioneered studies of uranium-lead radiometric dating methods, is famous for having used it to obtain one of the earliest accurate estimates of the age of the Earth.”
Mountain formation can occur relatively quickly. Some form, rising very quickly (research how islands form overnight in the ocean from uprising).
The fact that even on very tall supposedly billions of year old mountains are found sea shells from recent geological periods should cause the open minded to realize that large movement have occurred in the past.
Geological changes do NOT take place evenly, but rather in fit/starts (cataclysmic forces at play). So I don’t think the existence of mountains is evidence for an old earth anyway!
Sorry, PB. Meant to reply to another post on this thread.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.