[ Young Earth ] dinosaurs to be carbon dated

[jasoncran]

http://newgeology.us/presentation48.html

 

[Hammer]

Evolutionists will dismiss all carbon dates of dinosaurs as invalid. They don't submit dinosaur remains for carbon dating. I don't believe Evolutionists will accept any kind of direct radiometric dating of dinosaur fossils.

 

[reba]

A reminder: Nicks Sticky...

The YEC forum was created because there was a strong demand for a place where Young Earth Creationism could be discussed (not debated) with open-minded people, like a learning sanctuary for YEC. That's what this forum is about.

If you wish to debate either the theology or science of YEC, then this sub-forum is not for you. There are other forums for that. This YEC forum is for discussion only.

Participation in this forum is not limited to subscribers of YEC only, rather it is only limited by members' willingness to engage in an open-minded discussion of what YEC is on about.

So if you believe in an old earth, or anything else, feel free to come in IF you wish to respectfully discuss Young Earth Creationism.

Have fun, peoples!

 

[Milk-Drops]

A reminder: Nicks Sticky...

The YEC forum was created because there was a strong demand for a place where Young Earth Creationism could be discussed (not debated) with open-minded people, like a learning sanctuary for YEC. That's what this forum is about.

If you wish to debate either the theology or science of YEC, then this sub-forum is not for you. There are other forums for that. This YEC forum is for discussion only.

Participation in this forum is not limited to subscribers of YEC only, rather it is only limited by members' willingness to engage in an open-minded discussion of what YEC is on about.

So if you believe in an old earth, or anything else, feel free to come in IF you wish to respectfully discuss Young Earth Creationism.

Have fun, peoples!

I didn't argue anything from a theological point, and I didn't attack young earth creationism. I just pointed out that the website makes several errors on the process of carbon dating and I pointed out to Hammer that he was in error about radiometric dating methods.

If by open minded you mean I'm not aloud to point out something as simple as to why Dinosaur bones aren't tested with carbon dating in the first place, then what am I supposed to do when I see someone post simple scientific misconceptions?

 

[stovebolts]

I didn't argue anything from a theological point, and I didn't attack young earth creationism. I just pointed out that the website makes several errors on the process of carbon dating and I pointed out to Hammer that he was in error about radiometric dating methods.

If by open minded you mean I'm not aloud to point out something as simple as to why Dinosaur bones aren't tested with carbon dating in the first place, then what am I supposed to do when I see someone post simple scientific misconceptions?

Meatball Sub,

Anything millions of years old is not expected to have C14 since you can only use C14 dating methods for an assumed 60,000 years based on the tools and half life of C14.

The article mentions 2 things that are not supposed be found in fossils that are dated at millions of years old.
1. C14.
2. Soft Tissue.

What we now know as FACT, and a FACT that is indisputable is that we do find both C14 adn Soft Tissue in fossils. Both of these FACTS are swept under the rug by evolutionist, which is why this forum was created.