Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Liberty1970
The presence of C-14 throughout the geologic record is solid evidence that it is only thousands, not millions of years old.

"Earth age" estimates are based on Uranium decay, not C-14.

84 posted on 03/18/2009 3:34:37 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic
The presence of C-14 throughout the geologic record is solid evidence that it is only thousands, not millions of years old.

"Earth age" estimates are based on Uranium decay, not C-14.

In the old-earth model, yes. But my point was that C-14 is now well known to exist alongside C-12 even deep in the fossil record. Coal deposits and diamonds (which are composed of carbon) have been consistently 'dated' with C-14 dating techniques.

C-14 has a half-life of only ~5.7 KYA. At this rate after 10 half-lives (c. 57,000 years) less than 1/1000 of the original portion of C-14 would remain. After a million years a mass of C-14 the size of the earth would have completely decayed, not even a single atom of C-14 remaining. So the presence of C-14 in coal and diamonds conventionally thought to be hundreds of millions of years old is strong evidence they are not that old at all.

99 posted on 03/18/2009 6:41:31 PM PDT by Liberty1970 (Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson