They were too big for the Ark...
This leads to a further insight: if the bulk of the fossil record was buried only thousands of years ago, then the biomass in that record was part of the biosphere before that time. That means that C-14 produced back then was diluted amongst much greater amounts of C-12 than we have at present. And that means that current estimates of age using C-14 dating will be telescoped out several times too far. (For example, if 15/16's of the biomass of the earth were buried one C-14 half-life ago - around 5570 years ago - then any C-14 dating of samples from before that point will be off by a factor of 4 half-lives, or over 20,000 years).
Your expertise needed -ping
If you had been watching the show Terra Nova, you would know. s/
They use other forms of radiometric dating for dating volcanic rocks above and below the rocks (rock layers) that fossils are found in.
I know dinosaurs never co-existed with man: you certainly would never see cave paintings of people chasing antelope with spears.
They’d all be of villages running in terror from Allosaurs and Tyrannosaurs.
How long does it take for the content of bone structure to be replaced by minerals, transforming it to rock? Well over six thousand years, that’s for sure. God created the universe in six days, but remember that when the prophets wrote the Bible there was no concept of geological ages. Days were easy for even the uneducated to understand.
Missing the message by dwelling on the minutia.
“Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a technique used to date materials such as rocks, usually based on a comparison between the observed abundance of a naturally occurring radioactive isotope and its decay products, using known decay rates. It is the principal source of information about the absolute age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of the Earth itself, and can be used to date a wide range of natural and man-made materials. Together with stratigraphic principles, radiometric dating methods are used in geochronology to establish the geological time scale. Among the best-known techniques are radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon dating and uranium-lead dating. By allowing the establishment of geological timescales, it provides a significant source of information about the ages of fossils and the deduced rates of evolutionary change. Radiometric dating is also used to date archaeological materials, including ancient artifacts.
Different methods of radiometric dating vary in the timescale over which they are accurate and the materials to which they can be applied.”
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.
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.
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.]
I doubt that the carbon dating method is accurate even for the 30,000 years. There are many uniformitarian assumptions in the method and all are questionable, IMHO.
Dino fossils are dated by the rock layers the fossils are found in. The rock layers are dated by the fossils they contain. If this seems like circular reasoning to you, that is because it is circular reasoning.
Don’t worry about it. Time is something they made up just to get you through your day.
Is it possible that God created the earth “old”? I mean, when He created it, maybe it came chock full of dinosaur bones, fossils, petrified trees, and the whole nine yards... The bottom line is that God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. He created man in His own image and likeness. Man sinned and needed a savior. Jesus came, lived among us, was crucified, died, and rose again to save us. Timelines ? not much to get hung up about. Gods creation is fascinating, though.
Mainstream science and media have been completely convinced of long ages for the earth and universe ever since Charles Lyell’s geologic research writings from about 1820 iirc.
However true science has found many many problems with both long ages and evolution esp. any with a biblical perspective [my viewpoint too].
Here are several links from my homepage - imho the best is creationscience.com a complete online science research book that combines the majority of jigsaw pieces from science into what Dr. Walt Brown PhD from M.I.T. - the book presents his hydroplate theory in section II. Section I presents a plethora of stuff that we do know about evolution and science. Section III is in-depth questions and answers. I bought the 8th edition hardback version brand new for about $30. Dr. Brown presents most of it in everyday language but also provides footnotes and bibliography showing the vast amount of research he has been doing for well over 50 years.
101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
Center for Scientific Creation - In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood
Dinosaur Shocker - 68 million year old T Rex w/ red blood cells
New Chromosome Research Undermines Human-Chimp Similarity Claims
Science in the Bible
Testimonies of Scientists Who Believe the Bible