only can date something 11,460 years old, doesnt this make it slightly hard to date dino bones at "x" million years? also what about the red bolld cells found in a t-rex thigh bone? cells simply can not exist that long, only a few thousand. id like an evolutonist to try and explain these other than saying im retarted or whatever for believing in God, id like a scientific response, not a ill informed 2 word answer, thank you
.Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.
Euripides (484 BC - 406 BC)
2006-10-31 09:26:02 · 8 answers · asked by supratuner9 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Interesting (and ironic) Euripides quote there.
2006-10-31 09:33:28 · answer #1 · answered by Sweetchild Danielle 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Radiocarbon dating isn't used to date fossils, for exactly the reason you mention. There are far more methods for radiometric dating than C14.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating
Check it out yourself.
----
Just noticed the question about cells. The interesting thing about cells is, independant of bacteria or the like, and protected in an hermetically sealed container, cells will stay together pretty well, even without metabolism. So if a small amount of blood became trapped and sealed in a bone, and the bone provided an air-tight, water-tight environment, and the small amount of tissue was otherwise bacteria free, the cells would hold their own through time until the bone was cracked open.
2006-10-31 09:30:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Radiocarbon 14 dating isnt used to date fossils. Just like magnetic fields of the earth shouldnt be used to justify a young age of the earth... It simply isnt a good tool for that...Uranium or Potassium are used for dating - much longer half-life.
As for the DNA in a trex thigh bone, who are you to say that cells cannot last this long if fossilized or perhaps frozen in the artic tundra such as with mammoths??? Just cuz you say they cant last that long doesnt mean that they havent. They have. This evidence is possessed by man - or do you think it is all a lie made up to counter your Bible???
2006-10-31 09:35:10 · answer #3 · answered by YDoncha_Blowme 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well if you have your way and the world is only 10K years old, then these dinosaurs must have walked among fully evolved men. In fact there is not enough time in 10K years for all species to have lived. I find that so strange that some people could believe in such absurd things.
And so what you didn't say that the world is only 10k years old.... your bible did.
2006-10-31 09:35:51 · answer #4 · answered by devilkin_007 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's spelled "retarded", not retarted. Where did you get the numbers anyways? Non-stable carbon decays at a predictable rate, and yet I've never heard of it ever actually "disappearing". Perhaps you have been reading too much Christian propaganda, and thus it's possible that neither your information or your figures are correct. Sorry I couldn't give a more definitive answer, however, neither you or I are experts.
2006-10-31 09:33:32 · answer #5 · answered by reverenceofme 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I would like to see the Scientific Guys come up with a Dependable System of Dating Objects too.
Sure would help All of Us.
2006-10-31 09:34:24 · answer #6 · answered by maguyver727 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
nope, there are plenty of radioactive isotopes with much longer half-lifes that can be used to date things(like potassium), this isn't an issue
2006-10-31 09:38:31 · answer #7 · answered by Nick F 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
talking foolish to someone with sense and the one with sense calls you foolish too. i think everyone is just calling everyone else foolish now then... except fools who talk to other fools and people with sense to others with sense. LOL. good point though ^^
2006-10-31 09:28:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋