Robert whitelaw carbon dating


26-Aug-2018 18:04

robert whitelaw carbon dating-54

Chat con video de lesby gratuito

The testing included many fossil bones, such as Neanderthal Man, Rhodesian Man, and the supposedly extremely ancient Keilor Skull; Mammoth bones (only 3,370 years!), extinct animals like Sabre Tooth Tiger, coal, oil, and fossil wood; also deep ocean cores of what was supposedly the most primitive life.But modern data show the imbalance to be about 40% or more.While its accuracy is questionable, C-14 dating results often are an embarrassment to evolutionists.The dating method depends on one thing – equilibrium; on production of C-14 up there and its decay down here on earth being in equilibrium – which should have been achieved after 30,000 years.When Walter Libby devised the dating method in 1946, his figures showed 20% greater production than decay. Accordingly his figures were dismissed as an experimental error; and equilibrium was assumed to exist.Other rocks near Hualalei, Hawaii were formed by volcanic action in 1801.Potassium-Argon dated these young rocks at 160 million to 3 billion years.

robert whitelaw carbon dating-35

Sex sits for free with no email

Space probes have shown that the ratio on Mars is very different, with much less argon-36; while the ratio on Venus is very different the other way.Decay rates will vary if, for instance, cosmic radiation varies.Cosmic radiation almost certainly has varied through variations in the earth's magnetic field, and also through Supernova explosions in nearby stars. Frederick Juneman commented in 1972 that the effects of such super-explosions must reset our atomic clocks, knocking our radioactive dating measurements "into a cocked hat." The third assumption regards measuring the "decay-produced" (or "daughter") lead or argon.Robert Whitelaw, in an extraordinary effort, has checked 30,000 recorded C-14 datings, applied corrections and plotted them.

He found two important things: (a) There appears to be a period, about 5,000 years ago, when there existed almost no living things, but abundant life preceding that point of time, and then evidence of increasing life following it.

Does it not tell us that the oldest rocks are 4.5 billion years old?