CARBON DATING UNDERCUTS EVOLUTION'S LONG AGES

ICR ^ | October, 2003 | John Baumgardner

[VadeRetro]

Most of these papers acknowledge that most of the 14C in the samples studied appear to be intrinsic to the samples themselves, and they usually offer no explanation for its origin.

Also, the ICR sharpies omit to mention what they do say when they do offer an explanation. (Hint: ICR would reproduce it in exquisite detail it if it helped them but they don't.) I suspect that such explanation is often omitted because the scientists involved assume they are talking to scientists.

[humblegunner]

Yeah ... your bearings - bear greese --- froze !

You're on the skids -- no wheels !

Sorry, I just don't get your meaning.
Did you attend some school or institute that taught you to try and communicate that way?

This is a waste of my time, I cannot communicate with bushmen
or Maori tribals either, if that's any comfort.

[Tac12]

Actually the fear comes from the creationist side. They
think their religion falls apart if they must admit that
their is very strong evidence for evolution.

You should look at the overall picture: everything fits nice
and consistently, universe is 15 billion years old, earth
around 5 billion years, plenty of time for evolution to
work its way from microbes to people. I really do not see
how you can still think evolution is wrong when one sees
how all plants and animals share the same DNA structure,
microbes evolve by mutations and big parts of the evolution
chain preserved in rocks.

[HalfFull]

the thing is, each one of his days are about 670,000,000 years long

Many people share your opinion, but it seems the amount of C14 can still be measured in fossils that are supposted to be many million of years old. Since C14 cannot be measured more than 20,000 years or so, what is your explanation?

[ForOurFuture]

I understand it. But I reject it.

I'm supposed to make like I believe in God because if he finds out I really don't I'm damned to hell? I thought he was omniscient.

I'm not going to live my life pretending to believe in something I don't because of the fear that if I don't I could spend eternity in a hell I don't believe exists.

[HalfFull]

Because of the contamination factors already mentioned

nice long-winded post, vade. But where is the proof of their mis-conduct? Lets see it.

[VadeRetro]

Many people share your opinion, but it seems the amount of C14 can still be measured in fossils that are supposted to be many million of years old. Since C14 cannot be measured more than 20,000 years or so, what is your explanation?

So you haven't absorbed a thing so far, right?

[Prodigal Son]

Your question is off-topic..but your question has been dealt with. Freepmail me, and I'll discuss it with you. thanks.

Uhh. No. My question is not off topic. The article explicitly refers to the biblical flood. It also explicitly implies that dinosaurs existed at the time of Noah. This is very germane to the article you have posted. If the author didn't want this question asked, he shouldn't have added it to the article.

Also, don't freep mail me when I have asked you a question on thread. Whatever we have to say to each other can be said in front of everyone. It's better that way ;-)

[OldTypeAmerican]

Ok - evolution, huh? One question I've always wondered about (and I don't remember where I got it from) is how did eyes evolve? You have several supporting structures involved: cornea, lens, retina, optic nerve, optic nerve connecting to the brain, brain able to figure out what the signals mean, etc.

Question: did all these structures evolve seperately or all at once? individually these structures provide absolutely NO selective advantage until they are all fully formed and positioned in the right order and begin to work. At that point, I grant you that there is now one heck of a selective advantage, but before that point - what caused all these supporting structures to independantly evolve for no selective reason at all? The lens evolved by itself and then sometime later the retina and so on? I just don't see it happening. The odds are not promising for these substructures independantly evolving and being positioned in the right order and so on. How did this happen?

And on another note: I was at a Christian healing crusade and suddenly I felt something strange in my right shoulder - (which had a torn supra-spinatus tendon which made moving my right arm very painful for about a year and a half - I could actually feel it tear just about every day) and my shoulder suddenly didn't hurt anymore. I tried moving my arm all around and couldn't even find the pain at all. No pain. Could move my arm in ways I couldn't for the longest time. Completely healed. 5 minutes earlier it hurt quite a bit and now my shoulder has been perfect for 2 years now. I suppose Darwin reached out from his grave and healed me.

[narby]

Logically ... if God created evolution --- then God is the creator !

By golly, I think you've got it.

Evolution is fact.

Whether God had anything to do with it is outside of science's scope. So if you think He did, then HE DID.

[f.Christian]

Your wagon - chariot is sparking ... you lost the reins on reality (( id - ego )) !

[goodseedhomeschool (returned)]

Thank you for the ping and great article HalFull. I think the this and many things show a young earth.

[f.Christian]

One eliminates the other ... theism - creation ... vs ... atheism - evolution --- unless your schizoid !

[onedoug]

"Can you prove that God exists?

No. Nor can you, that He doesn't. Though I think I can offer a statistically compelling argument that He does.

[VadeRetro]

nice long-winded post, vade. But where is the proof of their mis-conduct? Lets see it.

Just tell me what you don't understand and I'll use shorter words.

[HalfFull]

Also, the ICR sharpies omit to mention what they do say when they do offer an explanation. (Hint: ICR would reproduce it in exquisite detail it if it helped them but they don't.)

Skimming again, huh VAde?Why not cease your smoke-blowing and insults and begin providing real discussion?

*************

From article: "Therefore they mounted a major campaign to discover and eliminate the sources of such contamination. Although they identified and corrected a few relatively minor sources of 14C contamination, there still remained a significant level of 14C—typically about 100 times the ultimate sensitivity of the instrument—in samples that should have been utterly "14C-dead," including many from the deeper levels of the fossil-bearing part of the geological record.2"

[narby]

nice long-winded post, vade. But where is the proof of their mis-conduct? Lets see it.

Yo. HalfFull.

The contamination Vade's talking about is rain.

You believe in rain?

[goodseedhomeschool (returned)]

I think there were dinos on the ark. Baby ones, not full grown. Think about it, most dinos were about the size of a sheep. A baby elephant takes years to grow huge. I would think a brachiasaur would take many years. They were not on the ark more than a year. Just a thought. They may be ectinct now, just as many creatures are.

[HalfFull]

Just tell me what you don't understand and I'll use shorter words.

Oh, I understand you quite well, Vade. Why not just call the researchers liars and dishonest...what's holding you back this time?

[goodseedhomeschool (returned)]

extinct* pardon