Re: Young earth creationists and Carbon-14 "dating" of diamonds

[SqueakerAlpha]

C14 dating is calibrated by tree ring samples and good to about 35,000 years. Too much c14 and the item test younger than it actually is. You then get to explain how radioactive decay rates have changed for Uranium-lead and a bunch of other tests.

[odinata]

This folks is why blood relatives shouldn't mate.

[SuperDuperAtheist]

Are you in your mom's closet?

Scientific, evidence based, facts, not opinions.

Man-made artifacts in coal? What?

[antonc81]

"what if the young earth creationists are right?"... If they were they'd be scientists, they'd be doing research at the worlds best universities, they'd be submitting research for peer review and having it published in the most respected scientific journals. They'd revolutionise science and be receiving professorships, Nobel prizes etc.. This has happened in other fields before. So far with "creation science" it's just been a bunch of amateurs publishing on creationist websites.. go figure.

[hosebeatings]

You sir, are an idiot. Trying to claim scientific facts are actually opinions (and thus no more valid than your ass-born assertions) is one of the most pathetic debate techniques in the book. It's scarcely better than lying.

[HConstantine]

Sorry, but its a fact that creationists do lie all the time, even when they tell the truth.

[HConstantine]

A layer water above the atmosphere could not exist. Why wouldn't it fall through he atmosphere?

[FatRakoon]

Man-made stuff found in coal?

When ?

Where ?

Who said this bullshit?

No man made anything has ever been found in coal ... EVER!

[lhvinny]

Water cannot and does not form a canopy as you describe. Please watch part 5 of "Why do people laugh at creationists?" to find out more.

I agree that <1% of the world population has done scientific study in a lab, but they are more than welcome to enter the lab and verify the results themselves. It is an observation made by few that can be tested and verified by all. You complaint is invalid.

[NoFaithNoPain]

How can you possibly put your face to this? I thought it was a joke at first. You do come from a 1st World country right?

[mcrd2001]

Some very good points. We should all be more rigorously educated in all fields. I, at this point in my life, have never started a fire without matches or a lighter...this seems like something that everyone should be able to do. Thanks for posting.

[WildwoodClaire1]

No "manmade artifacts" have been found in coal.

[MirageScience]

1) tell me how you would get that layer of water above the atmosphere?

2) tell me how water would even change the amount of C 14

For question number 2 don't parrot someone else's answer. Water isn't as special as Hovind thinks with his ice meteors and water/ice shield.

[torment3d]

Just wanted to address your point about the flood... We do know that there was a flood, but that it happened approximately 36,000 years ago, not 4,000 years ago. If that were the case... well... ancient egypt?

[billredeemed]

@torment3d Sorry about your name. Also you are the first one I have heard say that there was a world wide flood at all, if that is what you are saying. How do we date ancient egypt? Also I wonder if you have ever pondered the effect of introducing the unimaginable concept of 'billions of years' into our minds, or should I say saturating. To me what is does is to make 4000 years seem like a very short time.

[billredeemed]

cont.

To correct the damage done in my own mind our Lord showed me this: I am forty years old. When I look back on my life things that happened twenty years ago seem like another life and well my earliest clear memories of 30 to 35 years ago seem like an 'eternity'. Now when I am 70 or 80 if Jesus is willing I can only imagine how long it will seem that I have lived.

[billredeemed]

cont.

Now with that sense of time in mind turn and look at 6,000 years (the approximate age of the earth) and you will see that 6000 years looks like a very long time. It really is very realative. That is, our sense of time.

[torment3d]

@billredeemed I think you're very wrong mate. We date ancient egypt back between 4000 and 6000 years old, and this far predates Jesus. Also, the earliest biblical notes are dated between 2000 and 4000 years old. I believe the dead sea scrolls are around this time as well?

I think Science is at least trying to put dates on everything. I've found creationists just kind of add up the time we've been around and think that that's that. If that were the case, the universe would move far quicker...

[billredeemed]

@torment3d  The question was, "How do we date ancient Egypt?"

[torment3d]

@billredeemed The answer is in the writings within egypt itself, with many dates and timings of natural events.

[billredeemed]

@torment3d Where can I get access to this information? What do they use as a reference point for these 'dates'? And what 'natural events' do you refer to? Thanks.

[torment3d]

@billredeemed You can try Wikipedia for some easy-to-find, shallow information. Or you can read books like fingerprints of the gods which has quite a lot more information. The references they use are ancient egyptian literature, and historical journals (in this case, writings on the walls of the pyramids and other structures).

[billredeemed]

@torment3d Ok thanks I will check it out. I wonder on the subject of choosing whom to believe if you would mind taking a look at a video I have on the subject. Most comments I have recieved from unbelievers indicate unbelief in this idea as well. It's called "do yo believe or know? for Atheist and Christians"

[torment3d]

@billredeemed sure man, message me.

[torment3d]

@billredeemed ... cont... my name is a personal choice, no need to apologize ;) there is "evidence" of a "possible" world flood - fish fossils have been found on everest. There's only 1 possible reason for this: everest was underwater at some point. If you haven't picked it up, I'm not exactly theist, but I believe there is room for evolution and "creation", but not "creationism", as this assumes that a lonely dude up above needed some company..

[billredeemed]

@torment3d Actually one of the major doctrines I and many other people claim is that God was and is completely fullfilled in His Trinitarian Self. The act of Creation is to share the love that He has within that relationship. Jesus spoke a lot of the main idea here; that it is better to give than to recieve and that we should prefer others well being to our own. Just like the opposite of satan. Most people only have a vague notion of what God's children really believe.

[greeneto]

*Additionally*, when you are dealing with the tiny amounts of C14 being measured (in the case of the tiny amounts of C14 found in some diamonds), the *background* level of C14 *in the measuring instrumentation* becomes significant, because there is also a tiny amount of C14 background.

Finally, in regard to the separate claim in your video regarding past levels of C14 production, you have ignored C14 calibration. Read the "Calibration" section of the "Radiocarbon dating" topic in the Wikipedia.

[greeneto]

Hi Bill, unfortunately you are addressing a different topic than what I was discussing in my video. I was specifically discussing the production of tiny amounts of C14 in diamonds by radioactive decay particles produced by the radioactive decay of uranium and thorium in the ground. (And yes, by its very nature it is relative to the geological context of the diamond.) This is irrelevant to the C14 dating of organic material (which is related to C14 produced in the atmosphere).

[machomaas]

Whether you trust the ice dating or not doesn't matter. The point is that the total amount of Be-10 deposited is consistent with old ice and the present day deposition rate (of Be-10). In order for this total amount to be deposited in a few thousand years the production rate must have been many times larger than it is now. Of course that would mean that there was more C-14 too, right? But as you go down into the ice sheet the Be10 is pretty much constant but the C-14 decreases, cont....

[machomaas]

decreases in just the way we would expect if the C-14 in the ice were decaying away to nothing.

[machomaas]

Co: lower production rates in the past

Another isotope Beryllium-10 is produced by same the same cosmic rays as C14. Be-10 is deposited on the ice sheets. This is one way to calibrate the production rate of C14. The production rate is essentially constant over at least the last 400,000 yrs. If you say that the ice sheets didn't form until after flood then the cosmic ray flux must have been at least 100 times greater after the flood to make all that Be-10.

[billredeemed]

@machomaas

[billredeemed]

@machomaas I have two links for you to research why the ice dating is in error but this comment thing has changed somehow and i can't put the links on here. If you want to research it yourself just type in ice dating in the serch box and look for one that says 'evolutionslies...' i think the author is thewaytruthandlife's

[1965ace]

They are assuming cosmic radiation levels are constant, atmospheric gases have been constant, and C14 can only come from this "consistent process". But wait now they say C14 can be created underground from natural radiation in the ground.

[hunchbacked]

@gregelliselizabethno

Once again carbon dating not proven false by someone of the delusional side; keep up the delusion, amen brothers and comrades worshippers of fairy tales.

[billredeemed]

You are wrong the decay rate is the constant; i can't even believe i am responding...

[evansphoto]

you are misunderstanding the concept of carbon dating. It is not "how much" is in an object it is the decay rate of the radiationlevel in the molecules which is a consistent factor in ALL carbon isotopes. I would say nice try, but it was not even that. Admit it if you don't understand it.