- Why is carbon-14 dating not used for dating dinosaur bones/fossils?
- Considering Contamination
- Dating Sedimentary Rock - How Do Scientists Determine the Age of Dinosaur Bones? | HowStuffWorks
- Report Abuse
However, these tissues have been significantly stabilized by cross-linking in the course of aging. While there is evidence for some heme units heme is a stable portion of hemoglobin , there are no actual red blood cells. For other fossil dinosaur samples, it is possible that the flexible material found in them is recent bacterial biofilm, not original organic molecules.
Thomas Kaye presented convincing evidence that some of the flexible material he extracted from fossil dinosaur or turtle remains was biofilm. He also found that little red objects which initially looked like red blood cells in blood vessels were actually microclusters of iron oxide. That scientists are unable at present to give a complete account of the mechanism and trajectory of the preservation of modified proteins in the dinosaur bone pores is not some unique, embarrassing case. This situation arises constantly in the course of scientific discovery.
But when genuine science is brought to bear on these issues, they are eventually readily explained within the framework of an old earth and accepted physics.
Why is carbon-14 dating not used for dating dinosaur bones/fossils?
It may take some years, however, to come to a satisfactory resolution. A number of these supposed evidences for a young earth are exposed here. The absence of long, sequenceable chains of DNA in any dinosaur fossils indicates that these fossils are much older than the year age allowable in young earth creationism. The same held true for sequences of proteins. This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. In fact, we know the ratios are changing now, and have been over time.
- best black lesbian dating app.
- The research by Miller et al..
- Carbon 14 in Dinosaur bones - Scientific Evidence - The BioLogos Forum.
- What exactly are we dating here? Sample contamination and general trustworthyness.
- gastonia dating.
- .
But some scientists have applied carbon dating to dinosaur bones. If we apply the standard assumptions that scientists typically apply when using carbon dating, we come up with these simple results: If this is not correct , it could mean the dating method is flawed because the assumptions are wrong, and all dates gathered using the method are suspect.
It could also mean the bone specimens were contaminated which is highly unlikely. But if there is no contamination, the results heavily imply that the theory that dinosaurs died 65 million years ago is incorrect. In this particular case, the dinosaurs were dated to between 10, and 25, years old. But since the age predicted by the method is wrong i. But the differences arise because of the underlying presuppositions about the past of the two groups.
The museum curator from whose museum the dinosaur bone samples were taken was outraged.
You have to know how old the sample is before you test it, you see. Otherwise your results are wrong. An objective scientist would explore the discrepancies produced by the dating methods. If dinosaur bones are not 65 million years old, then this poses serious problems to the entire modern science guild who has built its house upon the sandy shores of evolution theory.
Grant money is at stake. Jobs and careers are at stake. Their conclusions differ because their bounding conditions and assumptions about the past differ. They are hostile, as the quotes above demonstrate. Their personal god may be Mammon, or job security.
- free matchmaking sites.
- Carbon, Radiometric Dating - CSI.
- .
- How Do Scientists Determine the Age of Dinosaur Bones?!
- young speed dating bristol!
They have vested interests in one or both of those things. They also have a different, but significant vested interest: They must prove that He is not real. Soft tissues in dinosaur bones: Mark Armitage and the triceratops horn. Mark was suddenly terminated by the Biology Department when his discovery of soft tissues in a Triceratops horn was published in Acta Histochemica.
The university claimed his appointment at had been temporary and claimed a lack of funding for the position. This was news to him, and contradicted prior statements and documents from the university. Mark Armitage has a MS degree in biology and has been a microscope scientist microscopist for 30 years.
He was the president of the Southern California Society for Microscopy for several years. He has some 30 publications to his credit. Mark's micrographs have appeared on the covers of eleven scientific journals, and he has many technical publications on microscopic phenomena in such journals as American Laboratory, Southern California Academy of Sciences Bulletin, Parasitology Research, Microscopy and Microanalysis, Microscopy Today and Acta Histochemica, among others.
According to papers filed with the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, when Mark Armitage interviewed for an opening at CSUN for a "regular" "part-time" microscopist in he told the panel that he had published materials supportive of creationism.
Considering Contamination
William Krohmer, Manager of Technical Services and Safety, who would be Armitage's direct supervisor, was on the panel. The panel hired Armitage despite his creationist writings because of his exceptional qualifications. The position was Electron Microscopy Technician in the Department of Biology, working two ten-hour days per week. He was "permanent part-time" and was allowed to enroll in the full benefits package of the university. He ran the Microscopy Imaging Facility with its three electron microscopes, personally training students and faculty on their proper use.
He was often praised for his work and accomplishments.
Dating Sedimentary Rock - How Do Scientists Determine the Age of Dinosaur Bones? | HowStuffWorks
The Biology Department bought a new confocal microscope that used high-powered lasers for imaging and was computer-driven. Armitage supervised the installation of the new microscope. He was assigned to be the only instructor on it, with responsibility for control and supervision of the instrument.
In February , he was asked to teach a full graduate course in Biological Imaging for the Biology Department. In March , Dr. Oppenheimer sent an email to staff saying that the two days per week that Armitage was working needed to be expanded in order to facilitate the growing demands of the microscopy lab. In June , Dr.
Ernest Kwok was made chairman of the committee overseeing the microscopy lab, and became Armitage's new supervisor. In the summer of , Armitage responded to an invitation to participate in a search for dinosaur fossils in Glendive, Montana in the famous Hell Creek formation. He found the brow-horn of a triceratops; it was not petrified. Studying the horn at the CSUN lab, he discovered soft tissue in the supposedly million-year-old or more fossil. While teaching students how to use microscopes in the lab that he directed at CSUN, Armitage engaged them in brief socratic dialogue about the possible age of the horn.
Kwok's students was stunned by the discovery and implications of soft tissue in the triceratops horn, and told Dr. On June 12, , Dr. Kwok stormed into Armitage's lab and shouted, "We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department! Armitage reported this to the Biology Department chair, Dr. They both played down the event and told Armitage to forget it. Praise for Armitage's work continued from distinguished members of the Biology Department. In November , a photo of the soft tissue in the triceratops horn was published on the cover of American Laboratory magazine.
The former chair of the Biology Department, Dr. Oppenheimer, wrote a ringing endorsement of Armitage in a letter of recommendation.
On February 12, , the journal Acta Histochemica published a paper by Armitage describing the discovery of soft tissue in the triceratops horn. Acta Histochemica is a peer-reviewed journal of structural biochemistry of cells and tissue that welcomes advanced microscopical imaging; it has been publishing since On the day the paper was published, Dr. Kwok called a secret meeting of the committee overseeing the microscopy lab. Armitage had served on the committee for three years, but he was not invited. The committee decided to terminate Armitage.
On February 19, , William Krohmer told Armitage that there was a "witch hunt" being mounted against him, and advised him to resign. When he refused to resign, Krohmer told him he would be terminated. Armitage was fired on February 27, He was told that his job had only been a "temporary appointment". There is a sidenote to this story. Hugh Miller, head of the Paleochronology group, obtained a bone sample from the triceratops horn Mark Armitage discovered.
Report Abuse
As you can see, the bone was dated by them to 33, years before present. The data for their four dinosaurs is below. A remarkable find was published in the journal Nature in April The "bone bed is characterized by the presence of completely disarticulated skeletal elements at various stages of embryonic development". This made it possible to detect the preservation of organic residues, probably direct products of the decay of complex proteins , within both the fast-growing embryonic bone tissue and the margins of the vascular spaces.