Assumptions made carbon 14 dating Chat room wit no register
Another study showed that fossil ammonites and wood from a lower Cretaceous formation, which is supposed to be 112-120 million years old, also have detectable levels of carbon-14 in them.
If these studies are accurate, they show that there is something wrong with the old-earth view: Either carbon dating is not the reliable tool it is thought to be for “recent” dating, or the fossils and materials that are supposed to be millions of years old are not really that old. While these studies use several different samples, they represent the work of only a few scientists.
More importantly, the data are obviously threatening to some old-earth scientists, as the talk has actually been removed from the meeting’s official program!
This is in agreement with the two studies mentioned above, strengthening the overall case.Also, until there is some explanation for the trends in the data, such as the grouping I mentioned above, there is always the possibility of an alternative explanation.Despite my caution, I can say two things for sure about these data.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. While I can’t confirm the details in the quote above, you can see for yourself that the presentation was removed. However, if you go to the official site, you can see that the talk has been removed.Just go to the grid for Wednesday and double-click on “BG02” at the bottom of the fourth column.
For example, this study shows detectable levels of carbon-14 in a range of carbon-containing materials that are supposedly 1-500 million years old.