University of Oxford. Image: http://tustiendas.gentearte.com The clearest evidence of the inaccuracy of the radio-dating methods is the amount of information that is published on dating "curious" made with this method carbon - 14, for example:
The same piece of oak, has been dated at several universities with the following results: The archaeological museum of Cairo, was awarded an antiquity of 7,000 years.
The University of Madrid, was awarded an antiquity of 4,000 years.
Bordeaux University, was awarded 5,000 years.
UC Berkeley, was awarded 1,250 years.
The Pennsylvania State University, was awarded 1,440 years.
The Search Foundation in Washington, he won 5,000 to 6,000 years. [1]
have been dated shells alive today, in 2,300 years. [2]
mortar Oxford Castle, built 785 years before dating, was "having" 7,370 years. [3]
have been dated to Eocene rocks younger than 40,000 years. [4]
has been dating a recently dead seal, in 13,000 years. [5]
The same piece of oak, has been dated at several universities with the following results: The archaeological museum of Cairo, was awarded an antiquity of 7,000 years.
The University of Madrid, was awarded an antiquity of 4,000 years.
Bordeaux University, was awarded 5,000 years.
UC Berkeley, was awarded 1,250 years.
The Pennsylvania State University, was awarded 1,440 years.
The Search Foundation in Washington, he won 5,000 to 6,000 years. [1]
have been dated shells alive today, in 2,300 years. [2]
mortar Oxford Castle, built 785 years before dating, was "having" 7,370 years. [3]
have been dated to Eocene rocks younger than 40,000 years. [4]
has been dating a recently dead seal, in 13,000 years. [5]
monk seal. Image: http://encina.pntic.mec.es In 2003, British researchers discovered near the Mexican city of Puebla, human footprints of several adults with some children. The layer of the footprints were dated at the University of Oxford, by carbon-14 from the shells of molluscs, which contained, in 40,000 years later, another team of Berkeley Geochronological Center, dated to the method of Argon Argon 40 → 39, the volcanic ash that were the footprints of 1,300,000 years. [6] And that taught us that humans arrived in America 10 or 15,000 years ago across the Bering Strait.
And not to tire, we will quote, finally, the solemn "gaffe" of the dating of the Shroud of Turin, which was dated by saying that the linen that is made, "died", that is, was collected between the year 1,200 and 1300 of our era. (Just an object that we have enough accurate historical and scientific references for many centuries before that date). Precisely dating the date corresponds to the time when it is known that the sheet was exposed frequently to the public in the Plaza de Besançon (France). An object that has been dipped twice, we know, by the water from the fire! [7] How can thirteenth century a fabric that contains among its fibers, pollen grains of plants endemic to Syria and Palestine which became extinct in the ninth century?.
Given all this we have explained, it is logical to ask, is that scientists realize this?. We must try to get a little on your situation and understand that:
Behind all this matter there are many millions of dollars or euros, and if you doubt this, ask how much a team to make the carbon-14 dating, or simply " much is dating an object?.
top, most prestigious scientific journals rarely publish articles on paleoanthropology which do not have absolute dating.
In these conditions, add to the evolutionary paradigm is closeted to most scientists, who prefer to overlook in this matter, because deep faith or submission to the paradigm is such that operation scheme, in many cases, is: If the dating
I have done in the laboratory, the evolutionary scheme fits official magnificent.
If dating does not fit, for example: I get on the dating that the remains of a modern man are 2,000,000 years ago, "something goes wrong." Or the dating is wrong, or evolution, is not true. Menudo problem. If I get a reputable journal I publish this, "I will throw all over, going to marginalize me and we'll see if I lose my job." Well, I'll see a new date to another facility, or try it with another method of absolute dating, two, three or seven times, until one of them give me a date that is not opposed to the "truth" established.
Basically, as you know perfectly well that the dating is not very reliable, they have many problems of consciousness to find another date less problematic.
Luckily there are some who are brave and have played their reputation, and in most cases, lost. But there is always someone who follows in his wake.
end this point with the comment by Lee, R.: "The problems of radiocarbon dating method are undeniably deep and serious as no surprise that half of the dates made, are rejected. The question is rather: Llegar to accept the other half? ". [8]
[1] Sanvicens, A. "The truth about evolution" p. 132.
[2] Borruso, S. "Evolutionism in trouble," p. 146.
Jueneman, CF Industries in Research - 14, 1972, p. 16.
Wysong, RL "The Evolution-Creation Controversy" - Inquiry Michigan Press, 1976 p. 151. Rev. Science. Vol 141, p. 634-637. - 1963.
[3] Von Fang: Creation Research Society Quarterly - 11-1974, p. 18.
Borruso, S. Op cit. p. 146.
Wysong, RL op. cit. p. 151.
[4] Slusher, HS, and Whitelaw, RL, "The radiometric dating" Edit. Clie - 1986.
Sanvicens, A. Op cit. p. 59 and 60.
[5] Antarctic Journal. vol. 6 p. 21 to 1,971.
[6] Renne, Paul R., Feinberg, J, M,, et al. "Age of Ash with Alleged Mexican Footprints" Nature - 438: E7.
[7] What we had is apparent in any of the many books written about the Shroud of Turin. For example: Alarcón, Juan "The Fifth Gospel" - Edit. Numbert vassal - 1984.
[8] Lee, RE "Radiocarbon ages error" Anthropological Journal of Canada - Vol. 19 to 3 p. 9 to 1981.
Semogil March 3, 2010
0 comments:
Post a Comment