Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,227 Year: 5,484/9,624 Month: 509/323 Week: 6/143 Day: 6/13 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Carbon-14 Dating Debate Assistance Thread
Peg
Member (Idle past 5044 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 20 of 38 (492537)
01-01-2009 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by cavediver
01-01-2009 7:55 AM


Re: Bump for Peg to air her skepticism regarding carbon dating
it looks like i am not alone in my skepticism of C14 dating
... my question is why would you proclaim my ignorance when others here express similar sentiments??? Is it more acceptable coming from a fellow evolutionist or something?
quote:
...less prone to contamination/variance issues than C14 dating is
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by cavediver, posted 01-01-2009 7:55 AM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by JonF, posted 01-01-2009 9:10 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 22 by lyx2no, posted 01-01-2009 9:12 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 23 by RAZD, posted 01-01-2009 10:54 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 28 by Otto Tellick, posted 01-02-2009 12:29 AM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 5044 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 29 of 38 (492657)
01-02-2009 1:05 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Otto Tellick
01-02-2009 12:29 AM


Re: Bump for Peg to air her skepticism regarding carbon dating
ok so i've read everyones reply's and i thank you all for attempting to show me the light
I did not attempt to be dishonest and take beaglebob out of context. He wrote that there is a better dating method then C14 because it was not affected by variances
i think you will find one of my previous posts also mentioned the variances as a problem in C14 dating which is why i pointed out that it was not just some crazy idea i got in my head so i could hold onto my precious creationist theories, others also recognise variences as a problem for C14 dating... if thats not what he meant, then perhaps he could elaborate?
2ndly I am not a YEC and do not have a problem with the age of old homosapien/erectus etc or even that these exist. I merely doubt that they are human.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Otto Tellick, posted 01-02-2009 12:29 AM Otto Tellick has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Coyote, posted 01-02-2009 1:19 AM Peg has replied
 Message 33 by Otto Tellick, posted 01-02-2009 5:05 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 5044 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 31 of 38 (492672)
01-02-2009 2:47 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Coyote
01-02-2009 1:19 AM


Re: Bump for Peg to air her skepticism regarding carbon dating
thank you coyote for keeping it civil
here a few points of contention for C14 that i have found in print in various places
contamination of the samples tested for instance. Its always possible that a bit of wood, for example, from the heart of an old tree might contain live sap. Or if it was extracted with an organic solvent (often made from petroleum), a trace of the solvent might be left in the portion analyzed. Charcoal could have been penetrated by rootlets from living plants. Any of these senarios could affect the levels of C14
Live shellfish have been found with carbonate from minerals long buried or from seawater upwelling from the deep ocean where it had been for thousands of years. Such things can make a specimen appear either older or younger than it really is.
there is also the assumption that the level of carbon 14 in the atmosphere has always been the same as it is now. But we know that the carbon level has increased a lot since the explosion of neuclar bombs into the atmosphere and since the use of burning fossil fuels. So how do we really know what the levels were thousands of years ago?
volcanic eruptions also add to the stable carbon-dioxide reservoir, thus diluting the radiocarbon....so how do they account for all these possible variences in c14 in the atmosphere??? How can they honestly know how much to make allowance for???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Coyote, posted 01-02-2009 1:19 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by fallacycop, posted 01-02-2009 3:14 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 35 by JonF, posted 01-02-2009 10:13 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 36 by Coyote, posted 01-02-2009 11:28 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 38 by RAZD, posted 01-03-2009 12:08 AM Peg has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024