Originally posted by Tiza
Now, getting into the previous world-age is interesting because you're into the dinosaurs. They are mentioned in the Scriptures, but you have to know
where to look because they are described for us. I think in the LXX it says that the angels mocked them.
In order for there to be a description of dinosaurs in the bible then they would have to have been around for people to see them no?
It's about C-14 dating. Don't trust that dating, folks. I'm serious. Or before you decide to put your trust in this dating method, please
seriously study it.
Anyone who is interested in radiometric dating should
look into it. They will find out that its extremely reliable and very useful.
It's a bunch of hooey and just totally impossible. For it to even work and be reliable, the atmospheric conditions would have to have
remained constant for the last several thousand years. You all should know that that is just not the case. The rate of cosmic ray bombardment would
have to be the same in the centuries past. That is totally impossible.
The reason cosmic ray bombardment is significant to carbon dating is because the radiation can stimulate the creation of some of the relevant isotpes.
This, however, is not something scientists are unaware of. here
you can find a page that
deals with some of the issues relevant to C14 dating. Specifically:
Radiocarbon dating is based on the relative abundance of C14 in the atmosphere when a plant or animal lived. This varies somewhat, but
calibration with other techniques (such as dendrochronology) allows the variations are corrected for.
and here14 is produced continuously in the Earth's upper atmosphere as a result
of the bombardment of nitrogen by neutrons from cosmic rays. This newly formed radiocarbon becomes uniformly mixed with the nonradioactive carbon in
the carbon dioxide of the air, and it eventually finds its way into all living plants and animals. In effect, all carbon in living organisms contains
a constant proportion of radiocarbon to nonradioactive carbon.
this site saysThe variability of the C14/C12 ratio, and the need for calibration,
has been recognized since 1969 [Dickin 1995, 364-366]. Calibration is possible by analyzing the C14 content of items dated by independent methods.
Dendrochronology (age dating by counting tree rings) has been used to calibrate C14/C12 ratios back to 13,000 years before the present [Becker et al.
1991]. C14 dating has been calibrated back more than 30,000 years using uranium-thorium (isochron) dating of corals [Bard et al. 1990; Edwards et al.
1993], and to 45,000 b.p. using U-Th dates of glacial lake varve sediments [Kitagawa and van der Plicht 1998].
So the rate of bombardment can vary all it wants, there are controls in these experiments for these sorts of things. The variable ratio of isotopes
in the atmosphere is a known
issue, and is corrected for with these calibration methods.
also look here
for a number of articles on radiometric dating, not just carbon
The techs cut a tree limb off from a living tree that was growing along the Santa Monica Frwy. They took it back and ran a C-14 test on it. It showed
that it had been dead for 500 years. [...]The scientists did figure out that the carbon monoxide from the cars altered the absorption rate of the
What is your source for this incident, I would be curious to see it.
addresses this issue:
"The "reservoir effect" is well known by scientists, who work hard to understand the limitations of their tools. It is explained, for example, in
Faure  and Higham [n.d.]. Creationists making propaganda ignore that limitations of a tool do not invalidate the tool. "
And, again, there are multiple independent methods used to calibrate and control C14 dating. Your investigations into the science of geochronology
have been terribly incomplete if you are not aware of these methods.
This stuff effects the C-14 datings. So would the great canopy that covered the whole earth until Noah's flood affected C-14 datings.
you continue to bring up ths canopy, while ignoring the issues i brought up with it earlier. You also keep saying you don't have the time to adress
any of the issues that I have brought up, but keep bringing up other easily explained issues.
Will you or will you not address the problems with this mystical 'water canopy' existing?
Well, there's more, but I just won't go into it. It is interesting to study.
You need to be more thourough in your studies, these issues have been brought up repeatedly in the past. Apparently your studies were not adequate
enough to find the answers to these questions. If it was, then why don't you address why you feel those answers are wrong?
[in edit added this and corrected some of the attirbutes above}
After the canopy burst, this is why we have a rainbow after Noah's flood
Let me get this straight, you are claiming the the physics of light movign thru water droplets was somehow entirely different in the antediluvian
world, such that there weren't any rainbows? Are you actually claiming this?
[edit on 10-8-2004 by Nygdan]