Radiocarbon dates -- young coal and natural gas (things that C14 date too young/old)

The original posting of the message is here.The there subtitle is "Radiocarbon dates -- young coal and natural gas". The message is well focused, and I strongly feel that subtitle should be the new topic title at this topic. I could change the title, but I would prefer the topic originator do it.The title "Typical creationist mistakes" very much leaves the topic defined such that it could go most anywhere. Perhaps we could keep this topic at least confined to radiometric dating issues.Adminnemooseus

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

The topic theme was well outlined in message 1 and the topic title. All messages should directly tie into carbon dating considerations (like, the words "carbon dating" should be used in every message).In about 15 minutes I'm going to close this topic down for a while and decide what sort of housekeeping measures (message hiding, off-topic banners, etc.) are needed.AdminnemooseusEdited by Adminnemooseus, : "comming" to "coming" in subtitle. "messge" to "message" in message. Haste causes edits.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Remove "I think going into similar considerations of other radiometric dating methods would be marginally on topic" sentence from message.

---

I've added the "(things that C14 date too young/old)" part to the topic title.I had "hide" a couple of messages, on the way to "hiding" even more. Then I decided that in a muddled sort of way they might be on topic.Essentially, johnfolton is saying the peat dated (relatively) young, rather than millions of years old (which would be outside of the C14 dating range).Coyote thinks that those (relatively) young ages are what could be expected from the glacial/non-glacial history of the area in question. The non-admin mode (Minnemooseus) would agree with that.It seems to me that johnfolton is constructing a strawman (peatman?) in that he thinks the mainstream scientific perspective is that the peat in question is millions of years old. He needs to produce some sort of science side (not creationist) reference to support this millions years old peat concept. But that would be off-topic here. Maybe the place for such is in the Paging johnfolton. Bring your evidence for a young earth topic.Bottom line - The previous peat discussion should stop.My vision for this topic is as what I added to the topic title - "Things that C14 date too young/old".Such as the message 1 material, the C14 dated "very old live seals or snails", or the C14 dated "young diamonds".Or something like that - Topic drift control is a bitch.Adminnemooseus