Why Won't They Carbon Date This?

by Perry 246 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Perry

    "For the first time in human history a dinosaur fossil is presenting us with the opportunity to see what a living dinosaur looked like. In 2001 a field research team unearthed the world’s most complete dinosaur fossil, a Brachylophosaurus nicknamed Leonardo. This incredible dinosaur has all of its skin covering its body, missing only a bit on the head and tail. Leonardo has more soft tissue preserved than any other dinosaur fossil, and may even have some of its internal organs."

    Oh, the scientific community governing body says that would be considered independent thinking ... a big No, No. Might get disfellowshipped and lose some friends. Oh dear, the thought of someone not liking me makes me tremble.

  • shamus100

    I just see more blanks, Perry.

    I'm so sorry that Simon banned you and your bird. :'(

  • marmot

    For one thing, carbon dating is only effective up to about 50 thousand years, this find is over 70 million years old. The actual soft tissue has long since disappeared and has been replaced by minerals that have preserved the shape.

    Here is some more info from National Geographic on the subject: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/10/1010_021010_dinomummy.html

  • GLTirebiter

    Carbon-14 dating is useful only back 60,000 years or so. With a half-life of 5730 years, less than 0.1% of the original C 14 concentration remains after about 600 centuries (more than ten half-lives). At that point, the remaining concentration is comparable to the measurement error--so dating of older organic matter is not accurate.

    That's why they don't bother to try carbon dating of fossil dinosaur tissue: it won't tell you anything!

  • darthfader

    My dad wants them to carbon date the fossilized tissue and have it say that it's not 70 million years old, but maybe 50,000 years or something that more closely aligns with biblical chronology (whatever that is).


  • DagothUr

    There are many methods of determining the age of everything, but creationists' timer has stopped somewhere is the 60s and they keep shouting like a broken cuckoo-clock: Why don't they carbon date this, why don't they carbon date that? Get on your knees and pray to your god to reveal the age of Leonardo! I bet He will say it's 6000 years old and that Leo died when the water canopy's windows were opened. There was no more room for him in Noah's ark because of the elephants.

  • sizemik

    What marmot and GLTirebiter said . . . a "fossil" by definition, is not the original composition

  • bohm

    buhu-- why wont scientists use C14 dating wrong? buu-huuu

    well sport, it may be because creotards are the only ones who believe C14 dating can be applied without discretion to any piece of random gunk, and the result then say much beyond why morons should be kept away from expensive equipment they do not understand. Fortuately the later seem to be easily accomplished by writing "library" on the door to the laboratory.

    Scientists in general tend to ask questions like: "can this particular method be applied in this case?", "What is the risk of centamination?" and so on.

    I still do not believe the above questions are entirely outside the scope of your intellect, but that bible sure aint helping...

  • NewChapter

    Science is so much more fun than creation. They hold better parties, serve better food, make more money and have more interesting discussions. It makes better movies too! I'm watching Land Of The Lost right now---it's so realistic! LOL

  • nugget

    Because it is an inappropriate methodology for an artifact of that age - duh!!!!! Cantleave - feeling the afterglow of yesterday's apostameet in London

Share this