Add/remove tags to this thread

Topic: Carbon 14 in a Diamond and a Dinosaur Bone

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Status: Offline
Posts: 783

Carbon 14 in a Diamond and a Dinosaur Bone




What do you get when you Date a Diamond?

I once suggested to someone that we take a man made diamond and, if possible, date it to see what came out the other end. Problem is, of course, at the time, I didn't think it was possible to carbon date a diamond however, in fact it is possible to do just that as the article below shows.

We have no absolutely reliable dates of anything that is over 100,000 years old. Sure there are numerous claims that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago due to radiometric dating of the KT geological boundary. In depth study of the methods and assumptions used show that no method is anywhere near as accurate or testable as tree ring counting and carbon 14 dating. All other dating methods have serious problems and gross assumptions must be made. In addition potassium argon dating has been shown by many to have serious problems.

If,as popularly claimed, dinosaurs have been extinct for 65 million years, there should not be one molecule of carbon 14 left in their bones. If as popularly believed most limestone formations are 500 million years old, then there should be no carbon 14 present in them. Yet, when carbon-containing rocks or bones are tested they always contain c14.

Both creationist and evolutionist have taken the one material that cannot be accused of being contaminated and have used supposedly 500 million year to 3 billion year old diamonds to see if there is any carbon 14 in them. Anything that old should not have even one atom of carbon 14. Yet both sides get the same result and that is that 100 million year old diamonds do have carbon 14 in them. This is a serious problem.


Well, until such a time as something decides to carbon date a man made diamond, there is another possibility hinted at above and that is to carbon date a dinosaur bone. Since there is an anomalous result in dating the diamond which has no contamination, then the results of a carefully controlled dating of a dinosaur bone would also not be skewered due to contamination. The individual below had the very bright idea to Carbon Date a Dinosaur bone and, you guessed it, the date was far from millions of years old but only about 10,000 years old - meaning that it 'aged' during the flood about 4000 years because, as the Smithsonian told me in a letter back in 1996, "all man made dating methods are subject to error due to heat and leaching."

"What would happen if a dinosaur bone were carbon dated? At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Scientists dated dinosaur bones using the Carbon dating method. The age came back with was only a few thousand years old. This date did not fit the preconceived notion that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. So, what did they do? They threw the results out and kept their theory that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago instead. This is common practice.

I have documentation of an Allosaurus bone that was sent to the University of Arizona to be carbon dated. The results were 9,890 +/- 60 years and 16, 120 +/- 220 years. We didn't tell them that the bones they were dating were dinosaur bones. The result was sample B at 16, 120 years. The Allosaurus dinosaur was supposed to be around 140,000,000 years. The samples of bone were blind samples."


Welcome to my World...

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Members Login

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard