False Assumptions of Radio Carbon dating
excerpt: With regards potassium argon dating of recent volcanic eruption material it must be pointed out that such material from Mt. St. Helens eruptions of the 1980's gave very old ages in the range of 300,000 to 2.7 million years. This is not only so for Mt. St. Helens but also for modern volcanism in Hawaii and New Zealand. It's then logical to ask the question, if you can not get the age right for modern volcanism how can you get a correct age for unknown magma such as that in Africa, from where our alleged ancestors came?
Now if you are truly interested in the subject, you will enjoy these sites. If you are just a priest saying a mantra, you will hate them.
Know what I hate? Doing research for people who refuse to learn so they can piss on the results and the researcher.
We were talking vestigial organs. Or maybe you forgot?
My mistake; we were talking about vestigial organs about which you have not answered my assertions, but I also chimed in on your claim that scientists have dated elephant bones from modern specimens and egg shells of modern birds as being 100,000 old.
We are still waiting for any evidence of this. Please post a citation or move on.
When I got there I found an article titled "Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?" (Subtitle: Combatting Misinformation with Facts).
Unfortunately, I think you cut-and-pasted too quickly, because this article actually corrects misconceptions about the radiocarbon method, and shows why it is accurate during the Biblical period, rather than inaccurate.
An even better article is Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
The bottom line is that by calibrating radiocarbon dates via tree-ring sequences, we have a quite accurate calibration curve going back some 11,600 years.
I do a lot of this kind of dating. If you have any questions, let me know.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!
Such abject stupidiy! Such bold humor!