It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
But they are still today finding living T-Rex blood cells and marrow.
And possible neutrino flux of radioactive decay should be just thrown out the window?
Scientists of the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt have now carried out new measurements and have published their results in the journal "Astroparticle Physics". For three years, they checked the activity of samples with 36Cl in order to detect possible seasonal dependencies. Whereas the US-Americans had determined the count rates with gas detectors, PTB used the so-called TDCR liquid scintillation method which largely compensates disturbing influences on the measurements. The result: The measurement results of PTB clearly show fewer variations and do not indicate any seasonal dependence or the influence of solar neutrinos. "We assume that other influences are much more probable as the reason for the observed variations", explains PTB physicist Karsten Kossert. "It is known that changes in the air humidity, in the air pressure and in the temperature can definitively influence sensitive detectors."
Meanwhile, the data of another measurement series − this time for the strontium isotope 90Sr − have been evaluated and submitted for publication. Here too, even sophisticated analyzing methods give no indication of seasonal variations. It can thus be assumed that an influence of solar neutrinos on the radioactive decay does not exist − at least not in the order of magnitude postulated.
, which means to me it's still possible that it happened, was observed, on more than one occasion in more than one testing facility, as first reported.
at least not in the order of magnitude postulated.
www.sns.ias.edu...
The proton-proton reaction is the slowest in the proton-proton chain, and hence it determines the overall rate at which energy is produced. Unfortunately the rate of the reaction is so slow that it cannot be measured in the laboratory; the ``weak'' force that governs this reaction is the same force that determines the interaction of neutrinos with matter.
which means to me it's still possible that it happened, was observed, on more than one occasion in more than one testing facility, as first reported.
The solar neutrino problem was a major discrepancy between measurements of the numbers of neutrinos flowing through the Earth and theoretical models of the solar interior, lasting from the mid-1960s to about 2002. The discrepancy has since been resolved by new understanding of neutrino physics, requiring a modification of the Standard Model of particle physics – specifically, neutrino oscillation. Essentially, as neutrinos have mass, they can change from the type that had been expected to be produced in the Sun's interior into two types that would not be caught by the detectors in use at the time.
different energy neutrinos are produced by different nuclear reactions, whose rates have different dependence upon the temperature; in order to match parts of the neutrino spectrum a higher temperature is needed. An exhaustive analysis of alternatives found that no combination of adjustments of the solar model was capable of producing the observed neutrino energy spectrum, and all adjustments that could be made to the model worsened some aspect of the discrepancies.[2]
different energy neutrinos are produced by different nuclear reactions, whose rates have different dependence upon the temperature; in order to match parts of the neutrino spectrum a higher temperature is needed. An exhaustive analysis of alternatives found that no combination of adjustments of the solar model was capable of producing the observed neutrino energy spectrum, and all adjustments that could be made to the model worsened some aspect of the discrepancies.[2]
New Hydroxyproline Radiocarbon Dates from Sungir, Russia, Confirm Early Mid Upper Palaeolithic Burials in Eurasia
Sungir (Russia) is a key Mid-Upper Palaeolithic site in Eurasia, containing several spectacular burials that disclose early evidence for complex burial rites in the form of a range of grave goods deposited along with the dead. Dating has been particularly challenging, with multiple radiocarbon dates ranging from 19,160±270 to 28,800±240 BP for burials that are believed to be closely similar in age. There are disparities in the radiocarbon dates of human bones, faunal remains and charcoal found on the floor of burials [1], [2], [3]. Our approach has been to develop compound-specific methods using High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) to separate single amino acids, such as hydroxyproline, and thereby avoid the known human contamination on the bones themselves. Previously, we applied this technique to obtain radiocarbon dates of ~30,000 BP for Sungir 2, Sungir 3 and a mammoth bone from the occupation levels of the site [4]. The single amino acid radiocarbon dates were in good agreement with each other compared to all the dates previously reported, supporting their reliability. Here we report new hydroxyproline dates for two more human burials from the same site, Sungir 1 and Sungir 4. All five hydroxyproline dates reported are statistically indistinguishable and support an identical age for the group. The results suggest that compound-specific radiocarbon analysis should be considered seriously as the method of choice when precious archaeological remains are to be dated because they give a demonstrably contaminant-free radiocarbon age.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: OperationBlackRose
But they are still today finding living T-Rex blood cells and marrow.
No. They are not.
What may be collagen (a protein) has been recovered from some fossils, but collagen is not living. Nor is it blood cells. Nor is it marrow. It is a chemical compound.
Yes. Yes I did. Did you, or do you just ignore things that contradict your point of view? None of those three sources said anything about living tissue being found. They say that something that is probably collagen was found and that things that looked like blood cells were found.
Did you actually research the subject?
www.smithsonianmag.com...
This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. She’s horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. “They treat you really bad,” she says. “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.”
losangeles.cbslocal.com...
CSUN spokesperson Carmen Ramos Chandler told CBSLA Armitage was a a temporary hire between 2010-2013 and worked as an electron microscopy technician. She could not comment on the lawsuit as university officials had not yet received the complaint.
originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
And the sad part is that any scientist, even tenured scientist, lose their jobs when they find scientific proof contradicting any part of evolution.
losangeles.cbslocal.com...
originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
a reply to: GetHyped
The 'scientific community' is not really a 'community', it is a Dictatorship. Here is how it works.
You can't get a diploma or degrees if you don't believe in evolution.
If you have a diploma or degree, but publish a paper doubting evolution, you will get deliberate bad reviews, and lose your job. After you lose your job, someone will create a 'Wikipedia' page about you, calling you a 'Creationist'.
And in the end it will be as if you never accomplished any scientific breakthrough.
Why not look up Robert V. Gentry, and actually read his Papers. If you don't read it, you are scared of what you might find. It you do read it, but still stand by the 'millions of years' and 'evolution', you are ignorant of real science.
originally posted by: GetHyped
originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
a reply to: GetHyped
"This is a lazy appeal to authority. If I want to hear an informed opinion about nuclear physics, I'll talk to a nuclear physicist, not a biologist. If I want an informed opinion about biology, I'll talk to a biologist, not a nuclear physicist. Where's his evidence? Oh yeah, he has none. Color me surprised!"
His work shows that the earth can not be millions of years old. BTW, Wikipedia is not research.edit on 16-11-2014 by OperationBlackRose because: (no reason given)
Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving, characterized by an unbiased, honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways, including but not limited to:
One's personal beliefs do not interfere with the pursuit of truth;
Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis;
Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another;
References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided.
Harvard ethicist Louis M. Guenin describes the "kernel" of intellectual honesty to be "a virtuous disposition to eschew deception when given an incentive for deception."[1]
Intentionally committed fallacies in debates and reasoning are sometimes called intellectual dishonesty.