On 25/08/2014 8:33 PM, Jojo Iznart wrote:
...A few threads ago, a fellow here challenged me to provide evidence
for the inaccuracy claims I made about radioneucleotide dating. It
took me some time to find it but here are some:
I didn't ask for just any old list of radiocarbon dating anomalies. I
asked specifically for a reference to the "piece of leather from a shoe
made in the 1800's dating to 600,000 years ago". That seemed remarkable
as it is very difficult to imagine how any process such as contamination
could explain it. But having also searched in vain for such a report
myself, I guess it was just a YEC circulated legend after all, with no
truth to it.
1. Living Mollusk Shells dated 2300 years old - Science vol 141,
pp634-63
2. Freshly Killed Seal dated 1300 years old - Antarctic Journal vol
6, Sept-Oct `971 p.211
3. Shells from Living snails dated 27,000 years old - Science Vol
224, 1984 p58-61
...
As for this somewhat interesting list which you have provided, they seem
to be the very few outliers and anomalies which have been picked up on
by YECs and circulated around and around (eg you will find an almost
identical list here:
http://www.godrules.net/drdino/FAQcreationevolution3.htm)
However they seem to have pretty good explanations if you can be
bothered to look for them. For instance the living shells dated as old
are discussed here:
http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/Living_snails_were_C14_dated_at_2,300_and_27,000_years_old
And the freshly killed seal is discussed here:
http://evolutionwiki.org/wiki/A_freshly_killed_seal_was_C14_dated_at_1300_years_old
But I think you don't want evidence. You would much rather stir up as
much mud as you can find so that you can say - look it is really too
hard to see any pattern here, this evidence is of no value whatsoever
and the whole field should be tossed out as just so much crap.
But anyone without a gigantic agenda (which does not include you) will
not fail to see how all the radiocarbon measurements for ~50,000 years
fall within a very small measurement error - being the thickness of the
wiggly line <http://www.suigetsu.org/embed.php?File=radiocarbon.html> -
which on average decays exactly as predicted. Even the wiggles in the
line (which are the variations in the atmospheric C14 concentration at
those ancient dates) can be matched between widely varying deposits of
very different types and in very distant locations. As I now understand
it the starting C14 concentration is known to the exact year. There are
multiple complete and independent sequences (ie from Ireland and
Germany) of tree rings that can be counted back 11,000 years and that
are mutually consistent. Counting varves and measuring the radiocarbon
concentration of the organic sediment layers in Lake Suigetsu have
allowed the starting C14 concentration to be calibrated back to more
than 50,000 years (again exact to the year as I understand it). And
there is no indication of unusual deposits or gaps around the time of Noah!
In this regard maybe you would like to explain the "GISP2 ice core at
1837 meters depth with clearly visible annual layers" that you can see
at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GISP2D1837_crop.jpg. Every
indication (by counting annual layers) is that this ice formed ~16250
years ago - again with no evidence of disturbance or melting in a flood.
Other ice core data
<http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ice-cores/ice-core-basics/>
extend this evidence back to ~800,000 years without a significant break.
How can you reduce this stretch of data by a factor of ~200? Do you
think they could have had 200 blizzards per year for 4000 years to make
it look like 800,000 seasonal layers had formed in only 4000 years?
Next!
Something you wrote here
<https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg75002.html> that
didn't really make sense at the time:
... you have a problem because it says in one place that Moses wrote the
tablets and then it says in another place that God wrote the tablets. ... you
are quibbling about the
exact person who had the pen in his hand (or chisel)
The problem is that in Exod 34:27-28 it clearly says that Moses did the
chiselling, whereas in Deut 10:4 it says that God did the chiselling and
_gave the tablets back_ to Moses. If as you asserted Moses really did
the chiselling but God was "writing" - in that he was the author - why
would God need to _give the tablets back_ to Moses? Maybe God couldn't
see that well and so had Moses hand them up to him so that He could take
a closer look to check for mistakes before handing them back?
