Whilst i'm skeptical about some of the scientific dating methods i found this interesting and somewhat slightly pertubed.
[FONT="]Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS)[/FONT] this technology (AMS) involves actually counting the carbon 14 atoms as they are separated from the sample.
[FONT="]Researchers have found a reason for the puzzling survival of soft tissue and collagen in dinosaur bones – the bones are younger than anyone ever guessed. Carbon-14 (C-14) dating of multiple samples of bone from 8 dinosaurs from Texas, Alaska, Colorado, and Montana revealed that they are only 22,000 to 39,000 years old. Since dinosaurs are thought to be over 65 million years old, the news is stunning. And more than some can tolerate. After the AOGS-AGU conference in Singapore, the abstract was removed from the conference website by two chairmen because they could not accept the findings. Unwilling to challenge the data openly, they erased the report from public view without a word to the authors or even to the AOGS officers, until after an investigation. It won't be restored.
[/FONT][FONT="]The theoretical limit for C-14 dating is 100,000 years before present using AMS. For practical purposes, it is 50,000 to 60,000 years. Dinosaur bones with Carbon-14 dates in the range of 22,000 to 39,000 years before present, combined with the discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur bones, indicate that something is wrong with the conventional wisdom about dinosaurs.
[/FONT]Carbon-14 dating dinosaur bones
Problems with old carbon contamination:
The following few examples show that often carbon dating can indicate items are hundreds of years older thaney actually are. This is due to the fact that animals and man often eat items with old calcium in them. For example do you take coral calcium as a supplement? Well guess what it often comes from old long dead coral which is packaged and sold to people who supplement their diet. The conclusion should be that true carbon dates for items can often be younger than the date given!
The shells of living mollusks have been dated using the carbon 14 method, only to find that the method gave it a date as having been dead for 23,000 years! (Science vol. 141 1963 pg. 634-637)
Shells from living snails were dated using the Carbon 14 method. The results stated that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. (Science vol. 224 1984 pg. 58-61)
A lake Bonney seal known to have died only a few weeks before was carbon dated. The results stated that the seal had died between 515 and 715 years ago. (Antarctic Journal, Washington)
What about a freshly killed seal? Well, they dated one of those too, the results stated that the seal had died 1,300 years ago. (Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct 1971 pg. 211)
Dating of Dinasaur bones: Radiocarbon dating of bone
Carbon-14 dating dinosaur bones
tick tock went the molecular clock for mtDNA eve, should one assume a date?, pass on the paternal mtDNA perhaps.
[FONT="]Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS)[/FONT] this technology (AMS) involves actually counting the carbon 14 atoms as they are separated from the sample.
[FONT="]Researchers have found a reason for the puzzling survival of soft tissue and collagen in dinosaur bones – the bones are younger than anyone ever guessed. Carbon-14 (C-14) dating of multiple samples of bone from 8 dinosaurs from Texas, Alaska, Colorado, and Montana revealed that they are only 22,000 to 39,000 years old. Since dinosaurs are thought to be over 65 million years old, the news is stunning. And more than some can tolerate. After the AOGS-AGU conference in Singapore, the abstract was removed from the conference website by two chairmen because they could not accept the findings. Unwilling to challenge the data openly, they erased the report from public view without a word to the authors or even to the AOGS officers, until after an investigation. It won't be restored.
[/FONT][FONT="]The theoretical limit for C-14 dating is 100,000 years before present using AMS. For practical purposes, it is 50,000 to 60,000 years. Dinosaur bones with Carbon-14 dates in the range of 22,000 to 39,000 years before present, combined with the discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur bones, indicate that something is wrong with the conventional wisdom about dinosaurs.
[/FONT]Carbon-14 dating dinosaur bones
Problems with old carbon contamination:
The following few examples show that often carbon dating can indicate items are hundreds of years older thaney actually are. This is due to the fact that animals and man often eat items with old calcium in them. For example do you take coral calcium as a supplement? Well guess what it often comes from old long dead coral which is packaged and sold to people who supplement their diet. The conclusion should be that true carbon dates for items can often be younger than the date given!
The shells of living mollusks have been dated using the carbon 14 method, only to find that the method gave it a date as having been dead for 23,000 years! (Science vol. 141 1963 pg. 634-637)
Shells from living snails were dated using the Carbon 14 method. The results stated that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. (Science vol. 224 1984 pg. 58-61)
A lake Bonney seal known to have died only a few weeks before was carbon dated. The results stated that the seal had died between 515 and 715 years ago. (Antarctic Journal, Washington)
What about a freshly killed seal? Well, they dated one of those too, the results stated that the seal had died 1,300 years ago. (Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct 1971 pg. 211)
Dating of Dinasaur bones: Radiocarbon dating of bone
Carbon-14 dating dinosaur bones
tick tock went the molecular clock for mtDNA eve, should one assume a date?, pass on the paternal mtDNA perhaps.
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
