U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 04-24-2010, 03:54 PM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,556,376 times
Reputation: 483

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R. View Post
Good question. Accepting carbon dating, even in a cautious way, would seem to mean accepting a world over 50,000 years old and I wasn't sure Campbell even went that far.
Well as the link below points out. If a sample died more than 50,000 years ago, it should have no measurable C-14 left today. So I would question such a date. And this is where we start having to make these assumptions, which are really impossible to confirm.

Limitations of and extensions to the C-14 dating technique
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2010, 12:15 AM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
7,884 posts, read 4,680,775 times
Reputation: 1525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
I believe it may be accurate to five or ten thousands years. Others believe it is accurate to 30,000 years. And others, to 80,000 years or more. Yet the more you expand on the dates, often the more assumptions you must be willing to make. I tend to be more conserative. If a sample died off 50,000 years ago. There should be no carbon left in such a sample. So I would question such an age, based on what should not be there.
Ah! I get it. Because you are a YEC you will accept C14 dating providing the results fall within a range that suggests that the Earth is no more than 10,000 years old. If the very same dating methods give a date of over 10,000 years old....the method is not reliable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 05:55 AM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 13,801,150 times
Reputation: 6456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
Well as the link below points out. If a sample died more than 50,000 years ago, it should have no measurable C-14 left today. So I would question such a date. And this is where we start having to make these assumptions, which are really impossible to confirm.

Limitations of and extensions to the C-14 dating technique
Very well 20,000 to 30,000 years then.

The early Upper Paleolithic beyond ... - Google Books

The Emergence of modern humans: an ... - Google Books

The Oxford handbook of archaeology - Google Books

The Cave Painters: Probing the ... - Google Books

If you accept a world that's 20-30 millennium old okay. If you can't I don't see how you accept radiocarbon dating.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 06:43 AM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,556,376 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
Ah! I get it. Because you are a YEC you will accept C14 dating providing the results fall within a range that suggests that the Earth is no more than 10,000 years old. If the very same dating methods give a date of over 10,000 years old....the method is not reliable.
Well I believe the earth to be around 13,000 years old. And dates that would suggest older I would question. Yet it is said that archeologist reject half of the dates that come back from C-14 for the oppsite reason. Especially when they test dinosaur bones, or even coal. Their belief system suggest that dinosaur bones, and coal should be millions of years old. Yet Carbon-14 dates show them to be thousands of years. So it's not like I stand alone here in the rejection of C-14 dating.

Carbon 14, Radiometric Dating, Unfossilized Dinosaur Bones, not millions of years old
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 07:02 AM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,556,376 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R. View Post
Very well 20,000 to 30,000 years then.

The early Upper Paleolithic beyond ... - Google Books

The Emergence of modern humans: an ... - Google Books

The Oxford handbook of archaeology - Google Books

The Cave Painters: Probing the ... - Google Books

If you accept a world that's 20-30 millennium old okay. If you can't I don't see how you accept radiocarbon dating.
Well Radiocarbon dates are often rejected from both camps, not just Christians, but archeologist as well. When dinosaur bones or coal is tested and shown to be thousands of years old, and not millions. Archeologist will reject the results of such tests. When Christians are shown dates that exceed the Biblical account, they will reject those dates. The fact is, C-14 may be close to accurate. Yet, I do not believe it is 100% reliable. And that is why there are such discrepancies which are understood by both groups. Naturally, dates of 10,000 years or less should be considered the most accurate. Whereas dates that excced that time frame, I believe become much more problamatic.

Carbon 14, Radiometric Dating, Unfossilized Dinosaur Bones, not millions of years old
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
7,884 posts, read 4,680,775 times
Reputation: 1525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
Naturally, dates of 10,000 years or less should be considered the most accurate. Whereas dates that excced that time frame, I believe become much more problamatic.
....because they disprove your YEC beliefs.

The mind boggles!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 02:10 PM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,556,376 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius View Post
....because they disprove your YEC beliefs.

The mind boggles!!!
And yet, the C-14 age of dinosaur bones disproves their beliefs. And their beliefs have been shown to be false in the past. Yet the Biblical accounts have not. So who are you going to believe? Those who have been proven to be false before, or the Biblical accounts that continue to be proven true by historical discovery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 02:18 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
24,854 posts, read 18,256,293 times
Reputation: 9864
Once again, science does NOT use carbon 14 to date dino bones... I made it red so maybe you'll see it this time....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 03:27 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
7,884 posts, read 4,680,775 times
Reputation: 1525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campbell34 View Post
And yet, the C-14 age of dinosaur bones disproves their beliefs.
See post 508.


Quote:
And their beliefs have been shown to be false in the past. Yet the Biblical accounts have not.
Yeah...you wish!


Quote:
So who are you going to believe? Those who have been proven to be false before, or the Biblical accounts that continue to be proven true by historical discovery.
...and of course you will ignore the historical evidence that proves the Bible wrong won't you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2010, 05:16 PM
 
7,654 posts, read 6,556,376 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Once again, science does NOT use carbon 14 to date dino bones... I made it red so maybe you'll see it this time....
And once again, that is because they incorrectly believe that dinosaur bones are millions of years old. Just like they use to believe soft tissue would never be found in dinosaur bones. They were wrong about the soft tissue, and they are wrong about dinosaur bones being millions of years old.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top