Dating site Posts

Are not results of carbon dating of skin samples agree, your

Posted in Dating

Carbondated dinosaur bones are less than 40, years old. Researchers have found a reason for the puzzling survival of soft tissue and DNA fragments in dinosaur bones - the bones are younger than anyone ever guessed. Carbon C dating of multiple samples of bone from 8 dinosaurs found in Texas, Alaska, Colorado, and Montana revealed that they are only 22, to 39, years old. Since dinosaurs are thought to be over 65 million years old, the news is stunning - and more than some could 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. When the authors inquired, they received this letter:.

The SWAB group routinely tests land-based labs involved in oceanography for gross levels of contamination. If your work is supported by NSF Oceanography there is no direct charge to your lab for such a swipe or swab test.

Once gross contamination has been ruled out using this less sensitive LSC method, AMS-based swipe tests are required to check for contamination at sufficiently low levels. In some cases an initial assessment of your submission may prompt us to request that you submit swipe samples or a bit of natural sample that we can use as a contamination check. A swipe sample is basically a pre-baked quartz filter that is wetted with alcohol and wiped over a surface. Repeated submission of highly contaminated samples is both costly and damaging.

Submitting Guideline Sample processing begins after electronic submission data has been entered through the Web Portal and the samples arrive and are logged in. We will return unused portions, if requested and a shipping account is provided. Please provide this information during the submission process.

thank for

If you would like the sample containers returned please provide your request and a shipping account during submission through the Web Portal. Additional Information General Sampling Guidelines. Carbon dating of bone is one of the most difficult tasks in carbon dating, and requires the most care of any carbonaceous material. This is mainly due to the nature of bone, which is a very porous material.

Certain parts of bone look like a sponge under the microscope. Many dinosaur bones are hard as rock because the original material has been replaced with a silicon material such as quartz. These are "mineralized" or "fossilized".

Carbon dating human bones and teeth is one of the services provided by Miami-based AMS lab Beta Analytic. C14 results are reported in 14 business days depending on bone quality. Throughout the last 40 years multiple 14 C dating of North European bog finds and repeated analyses of different organic components such as human bone or tissue, skin and textiles from closed contexts have played an important role in the development of 14 C dating methodology (Nockert and Possnert, , Tauber, , van der Plicht et al Cited by: Carbon dating is based on the assumption that the amount of C14 in the atmosphere has always been the same. But there is more carbon in the atmosphere now than there was 4 thousand years ago. (1) Since carbon dating measures the amount of carbon still in a .

We have found un-mineralized dinosaur bones. We then scrape the outer surface off to get rid of surface contamination, and date the inner remaining material.

absolutely useless

One can date just the purified bioapatite, the total organics, or the collagen, or a combination of these, as we did in several cases. This is a remarkable find because collagen, being a soft tissue present in most animals, is supposed to decay in a few thousand years.

Collagen is the main protein found in connective tissue of animals. It can make up from 1 to 6 percent of muscle mass. Triceratops and Hadrosaur femur bones in excellent condition were discovered in Glendive Montana, and our group received permission to saw them in half and collect samples for Carbon testing. Both bones were tested by a licensed lab for presence of collagen. Both bones did in fact contain some collagen.

The best process Accelerator Mass Spectrometry was used to date them. Total organic carbon and dinosaur bioapatite was extracted and pretreated to remove potential contaminants, and concordant radiocarbon dates were obtained.

They were similar to radiocarbon dates for ice-age megafauna such as Siberian mammoths, saber tooth tigers of the Los Angeles LaBrea Tarpits, sloth dung, and giant bison. We usually prefer AMS dating because of its inherent superior accuracy, but use the conventional method when large samples are available in order to completely rule out contamination. This is recommended by a carbon-dating laboratory specialist. Robert Bennett, physicist and co-author, agree that "the AOGS-AGU assembly encourages presentation of reliable data even though the topic may be controversial.

Radiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New Evidence from Raw Data

This is a very wise policy for the advacement of science and the education of people everywhere. Thus, we encourage our colleagues to do their own carbon dating of dinosaur bones from museums and university fossil repositories around the world, as well as testing for C in scrapings from dinosaur bones as they are excavated.

suggest you come

We are anxious to see their results presented, just as we have done. Also, we call on the news media and citizens everywhere to urge paleontologists, curators, university faculty, and government scientific agencies to encourage and support further testing for C content in dinosaur remains. Scientists need to know the actual chronology of the Earth and the age of the fossils.

More censorship by "scientists". Waldemar Julsrud, a German hardware merchant in Acambaro, Mexico, was riding his horse on the lower slope of El Toro Mountain on a sunny morning in July Suddenly he spotted some partially exposed hewn stones and a ceramic object half buried in the dirt. He dismounted and dug out of the ground the hewn stones as well as a few ceramic pieces. Julsrud, who was archaeologically astute, immediately realized that these ceramic pieces were unlike anything that he had seen.

The objects he held in his hand were distinctively different than any other known Indian culture. When a few ceramic fragments were found there, Julsrud hired diggers to excavate. This discovery brought world wide attention from archaeologists who at first mistakenly defined them as Tarascan, but later they were correctly identified as a whole New Indian culture - the Chupicuaro.

Julsrud at age sixty-nine was on the brink of making a discovery that may prove to be the greatest archaeological discovery ever made. He hired a Mexican farmer, Odilon Tinajero, to dig in the area where the ceramic figurines were found and bring him any other similar objects.

long time here

Soon Tinajero had a wheelbarrow full of ceramic pottery that had been excavated on El Toro Mountain. Charles Hapgood notes that "Julsrud was a shrewd businessman and he now made a deal with Tinajero that is very important for our story. He told Tinajero that he would pay him one peso worth about 12 cents for each complete piece he brought in.

Among the thousands of artifacts excavated were items that turned Julsrud's mansion into "the museum that scared scientists. The objects were made of clay and stone, varying in size from a few inches long to statues three feet high, and dinosaur objects four to five feet long. In the collection, that now numbered over 20, objects, not one could be found to be a duplicate of another.

Each of the clay pieces had been individually made, without molds, skillfully sculptured, and carefully decorated. Several hundred of the figurines were scientifically identified as representing many species of dinosaurs, including duck billed Trachodon, Gorgosaurus, horned Monoclonius, Ornitholestes, Titanosaurus, Triceratops, Stegosaurus Paleococincus, Diplodocus, Podokosaurus, Struthiomimos, Plesiosaur, Maiasaura, Rhamphorynchus, Iguanodon, Brachiosaurus, Pteranodon, Dimetrodon, Ichtyornis, Tyrannosaurus Rex, Rhynococephalia and other unknown or as yet unidentified dinosaur species.

These remarkable dinosaur figurines threaten orthodox concepts and time scales in many fields of study. Ivan T.

AMS Dating Different Types of Bones

Sanderson was amazed in to find that there was an accurate representation of the American dinosaur Brachiosaurus, which was almost totally unknown to the general public at that time. Sanderson wrote about the figurine in the Julsrud collection. It is about a foot tall. The point is it is an absolutely perfect representation of Brachiosaurus, known only from East Africa and North America.

Results of carbon dating of skin samples

There are a number of outlines of the skeletons in the standard literature but only one fleshed out reconstruction that I have ever seen. This is exactly like it. Eventually over 33, ceramic figurines were found near El Toro as well as Chivo Mountain on the other side of Acambaro. InArthur Young submitted two of the figurines to Dr. The Masca lab had obtained thermoluminescent dates of up to 2, B. In a letter dated September 13,addressed to Mr.

Young, Dr Rainey said:. Now after we have had years of experimentation both here and at the lab at Oxford, we have no doubt about the dependability of the thermoluminescent method. I should also point out, that we were so concerned about the extraordinarily ancient dates of these figures, that Mark Han in our lab made an average of 18 runs on each one of the four samples.

Hence, there is a very substantial bit of research in these particular pieces All in all the lab stands on these dates for the Julsrud material, whatever that means in terms of archeological dating in Mexico, or in terms of 'fakes verse's authentic' pieces.

But when the lab at the University of Pennsylvania found out that dinosaurs were part of the collection, they retracted their thermoluminescent dates.

congratulate, what words

They asserted that the ceramics gave off regenerated light signals and could be no more than 30 years old. A thermoluminescent technician admitted that no other ceramics existed, in his experience, that produced regenerated light signals, and no other thermoluminescent dating of ceramics had ever been done by utilization of a regenerated light signal.

only reserve

In short, the excuse was a hocus pocus, laboratory trick to avoid the obvious conclusion that dinosaurs and man lived together. John Tierney determined to expose the University of Pennsylvania's shenanigans by testing with standard procedures. Tierney had two fragments of Julsrud-type ceramics excavated at El Toro Mountain in Acambaro, and inin Julsrud's presence, Tierney submitted these pieces to Dr.

Victor J. Bortulot determined the pieces' upper limit age to be 2, years old, thus, invalidating the Masca report which claimed the objects were made thirty to one hundred years ago.

new day

John Tierney took a half dozen samples of Julsrud ceramics of different clay composition to a team of experts at Ohio State University. They consisted of Dr.

Creation v. Evolution: How Carbon Dating Works

Earle R. Caley among the world's most respected archaeological chemistsand Dr. Ernest G. Ehlers mineralogist in the geology department at Ohio State University. The team reported that they could not believe the artifacts were made in modern times, nor could they believe they were made by some amateur who tried to perpetuate a fraud.

Upon my notifying them that they had authenticated Julsrud artifacts, they lapsed into a profound and apparently permanent silence. InB. Video released the program "Jurassic Art", which contained an Acambaro segment that was originally supposed to have been part of NBC's television special, "The Mysterious Origins of Man.

Toward the end of the program, it is revealed that he sent two samples of Julsrud-type ceramics a human figure and a dinosaur figure to an independent Carbon laboratory. Startling results came back. Steede tap danced around the implications, embarrassingly embracing the human figurine as credible, while waltzing past the dinosaur figurine, claiming the laboratory test must not have given a true reading.

In reality, the dinosaur figurine created too much tension for orthodox science and Steede had to find an out. The solution was simple. He discarded the dinosaur date.

The Japanese company Nissi sponsored a television crew to go to Acambaro and produce a program for Japanese T. The program entitled "Did the Ancients See Dinosaurs? There is a stunning moment in the program as the Japanese narrator is looking over an animal figurine, and he holds it up next to his Japanese book on dinosaurs. Amazingly, the Julsrud dinosaur figurine matches the color drawing of an Amargasaurus cazaui in the Japanese dinosaur book.

The narrator quickly picks up another dinosaur figure and thumbs through the dinosaur book. This figure is very similar to the Saurolophus osborni as drawn in the Japanese dinosaur book. The narrator ponders the perplexing problem that ancient people about 4, years ago must have seen dinosaurs because they could not have known what they looked like by merely seeing their skeletons in the ground. The narrator points out that when modern man, such as Sir Richard Owen, found dinosaur skeletons, the first life-sized models of Megalosaurus, Iguanodon and Hylaeosaurus made from them were ridiculously inaccurate.

Individual censorship on YouTube - "NaturaLegion". A YouTube video by an uninformed evolutionist calling himself "NaturaLegion" ridicules the work of the Paleochronology group, including this webpage. I posted comments under the video that he at first answered and then removed.

They are reproduced below. At last they are being forced in desperation to discuss issues rather than patronisingly name-call and tell creationists to "go read a biology book". I work with Hugh Miller and the Paleochronology group that had the dinosaur bones radiocarbon dated, test results pilloried by "NaturaLegion". My email is on the webpage, and he could have inquired any time but chose not to. No shellac or other preservative was on any of them.

We have successfully used this technique to prepare and date samples of bone and of tooth enamel and dentin, with varying degrees of preservation condition, and from time intervals ranging from a few hundred Carbon years to greater than 40, Carbon years. He describes a lengthy "chemical cleaning" protocol that was used by his technicians to process the samples we submitted.

Cherkinsky and Christine Chataigner again explain this method in Radiocarbon journal,Vol 52, Nr. Collagen tends to undergo microbiological decomposition, hydrolysis, dissolution, and denaturizing over archaeological and geological timescales, so that only in exceptional conditions, such as burial in permafrost, is collagen found to survive without significant changes into Pleistocene.

Survival is usually far shorter for the bones buried in warmer regions. In contrast, the mineral fraction of bones and teeth could be preserved quite well". If secondary or "Modern" carbon could not be removed from samples, no items of any kind or any age found in natural environments could be Carbon dated. In practice, pretreatment works quite well to remove skin cells and other contaminants encountered during excavation, transport, and handling.

apologise, but, opinion

I call BS on this "NatuaLegion" video. Be sure and subscribe to all the rest! Finding preserved fragments of collagen and bone matrix protein from the interior of fossilized dinosaur bones was certainly a fascinating discovery.

Where mainstream paleontologists disagree with creationists is in the best explanation for the discovery: unexpectedly favorable preservation conditions or younger ages. I can literally provide you with enough peer-reviewed studies on molecular self-assembly, self-replication, neofunctionalization, the evolution of new genes, and molecular mechanisms in evolution to keep you busy for years to come, and I have s I can share of the original papers in case you have trouble accessing them on your own due to lack of subscriptions.

Just let me know if you would like to learn what data is actually out there in the research literature, instead of just reading whatever creationist organizations and websites tell you about it. I was referencing the article in The Columbus Dispatch saying that Miller obtained a dozen samples from the Carnegie Museum in They did claim to have found-and carbon-dated-collagen, no?

Dec 07,   By , new samples of organic material will appear to have the same radiocarbon date as samples from 1, years ago, says Peter Kohler, the lead author on the new study and a physicist at the Author: Ben Panko. In the first round of dating (sample numbers 3 to 25), samples were selected visually based upon the extent of mineralisation (e.g. Fig 1) and were only then subjected to ZooMS analyses following 14 C results. Within this first round, four samples (numbers 10 to 15) were tested from Green Cave, Chamber 5, all of which failed dating and by: Beta Analytic's radiocarbon dating cost varies by material type and service requested. Please indicate the following information in the form below so we can provide the appropriate prices. 1. Carbon Dating Services. AMS Standard - results are reported in 14 business days or less. AMS Priority - 6 business days or less.

If their claims of discovering and carbon-dating dinosaur collagen are not relevant to their conclusions, why bring it up? In response to your references to an Alexander Cherkinsky article, separating diagenetic from bioapatite carbonates is only part of the problem.

Carbonates are only one of many potential sources of exogenous carbon, and other sources are not as easily removed by treatment with acetic acid. Extracellular polymeric substances like proteins and polysaccharides from bacterial biofilm exhibit different chemical properties than mineral carbonates, and Cherkinsky's article makes absolutely no mention of extracellular polymers or exogenous proteins.

This is something I already point out in the video: the creationists behind the "radiocarbon dating" claims provide no evidence to establish what the primary source of carbon is. In most instances, the material being carbon-dated is much more well-preserved than the fragments of who-knows-what obtained from dinosaur fossils. When wood, fabrics, leather, human bones and teeth are carbon-dated, we already have a multitude of independent evidence that gives us some idea of about how old these items are.

Radiocarbon dating just helps us zero in on a more precise estimate.

opinion you

In the case of dinosaur fossils, Hugh Miller and his group of creationists claim to have obtained radiocarbon dates on endogenous sources of carbon But regarding the source of the radiocarbon signal detected, all they have are unverified claims. Nothing more. The results stated that the seal had died between and years ago.

Radiocarbon (RC) or Carbon (C) dating of linen, cotton, bones, fossils, wood, sea shells, seeds, coal, diamond (anything with carbon) is one of the most common and well understood of the various scientific dating methods. Carbon is a radioactive isotope of carbon that is formed naturally in the atmosphere. Mar 23,   Recent robust statistical studies add weight to this theory. Philip Ball, the former physical science editor for Nature when the carbon dating results were published, recently wrote: "It's fair to say that, despite the seemingly definitive tests in , the status of the Shroud of Turin is murkier than ever." If we wish to be scientific. A paper by Riani et al stated that "The twelve results from the radio carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin show surprising heterogeneity." They also stated that "Our results indicate that, for whatever reasons, the structure of the TS is more complicated than that of the three fabrics with which it was compared.".

Antarctic Journal, Washington. Shells from living snails were dated using the Carbon 14 method. The results stated that the snails had died 27, years ago. But these lava flows happened only about years ago in and Gary Parker.

Facebook twitter google_plus reddit linkedin



  1. Kajim

    I think, that you commit an error. I can prove it.

  2. Zulutaxe

    It's out of the question.

  3. Dazilkree

    In my opinion it already was discussed, use search.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *