Carbon dating dr dino
* Carbon-14 is Everywhere so it Can't Be an Anomaly: Carbon-14 doesn't lie. And it's so unstable that all 14c atoms in a sample would radioactively decay in far less than a million years.So, such radiocarbon in allegedly older samples could theoretically come from a secondary source like contamination, background noise, or neutron capture. For example, living bacteria might infest a dinosaur bone but the journal reports that this doesn't affect its carbon date because the bacteria doesn't feed on the 14c in the atmosphere but in the bone!The assumption by evolutionary geophysicists proposes that the 14c in diamonds, coal, etc., must have come from neutron capture by carbon-13 or nitrogen-14.Theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss told RSR's Bob Enyart (rsr.org/krauss) that 14c in allegedly million-year-old specimens is an "anomaly." However, an anomaly is something that deviates from what is standard, normal, or expected.As reported in 2011 in the journal PLo S One, in an allegedly 80-million year old mosasaur.
And if the 14c came from contamination, for example, one would not expect the contamination to so equally affect the bioapatite and the collagen.: Dinosaur bone showing 5pmc means that, because the 14c half-life is so brief, 5,730 years, if the radiocarbon is from contamination that occurred 6,000 years ago, a full five percent, i.e., 1/20th of the bone must have been replaced.Because radiocarbon exists in significant quantities, far above the least count (margin of error) with our state-of-the-art AMS labs doing the tests, these results can !The Radiocarbon field itself now widely acknowledges, and tries almost desperately to discount, that specimens supposedly millions and billions of years old will yield maximum carbon-14 ages of only thousands of years!Contamination is not only far more unlikely within deep-mined and unbroken diamonds, but because of the unique physical composition of diamonds, various kinds of contamination could be more readily detectable.: Just as forensic accountants can often determine when a criminal business has cooked its books merely by doing a Benford statistical analysis of the numbers, so too mathematicians have demonstrated that statistical analysis can indicate whether scientific data is likely a result of measurement errors.So evolutionists typically claim that all this 14c results from contamination, but statistical analysis indicates that when plotting erroneous dates (as from contamination), the data should fit a normal curve. As documented by Rick Sanders in in CRSQ, the distribution provides significant evidence that the radiometric ages do not result from contamination errors.