RADIOCARBON DATING BASIC INTRODUCTION
Radiocarbon (RC) or (C-14) dating of linen, cotton, bones, fossils, wood,
sea shells, seeds, coal, diamond (anything with carbon) is one of the most common and well understood
of the various scientific dating methods.
Carbon 14 is an isotope of carbon which is formed naturally in the atmosphere. All plants and animals
have a regular intake of carbon while they are alive. When an animal or plant dies it no longer takes
in carbon of any form. That plant or animal most often decays and its constituent parts break down
and are eaten by scavengers, or they decay,or are washed away etc. Once in a great while under catastrophic
circumstances the animal or plant is encased in some sediment, or frozen, or desicated, or otherwise preserved
quickly so that its structure and constituent parts are preserved.
We know that if we separate the carbon out of a recently dead plant or animal
there will be roughly five trillion atoms of carbon 14 out of a total of 6.02x 10 23rd power atoms of
carbon in a gram of pure carbon. Scientists have ways of counting the carbon 14 atoms in a sample and then
knowing the total number of carbon atoms and the number
of carbon 14 atoms they can figure out how old the material is. As with most scientific dating schemes certain
assumptions must be made for the method to be useful. With carbon dating we usually assume that after the
organisms death no more carbon is transferred into the dead material.
But what happens if it is a porous material that has been exposed to rainwater soaked with decaying matter? Do we know
that no extra carbon has been absorbed by the material under test? If we suspect that additional carbon has been
absorbed by the speciman can we process it in such a way that we can eliminate the carbon that soaked in over time
from the outside world? Can we scrape off an outer layer? can we chemically treat it to get at carbon that is in the
inherent structure? Can we process it chemically to rid us of absorbed carbon? These are questions that have been
worked on over the years to refine and make carbon dating the most accurate of all radiometric dating schemes.
C-14 has a half life of ~5,568 years,
The maximum theoretical detection limit is about 100,000 years].
Radiocarbon dating is the most accurate, most studied, most verified of all the radiometric dating schemes.
One of the chief reasons for this is that absolute dates for carbon material can be absolutely independently
verified for certain parts of its useful range. Radiocarbon dating is useable up to 50 to 80 thousand years depending
on various factors. All the labs doing radiocarbon dating report their information and it is compiled in the
"Radiocarbon journal". This journal publishes dates for materials throughout the world. It is a forum where
scientists can discuss the problems, solutions and issues using this technology
There have been serious technical conferences world wide for over 50 years where scientists gather to
exchange information concerning this technology. Labs do NOT get "absolute dates" as claimed by some. There is always
some degree of uncertainty and often dates are given as +or- so many years from a number.
For older samples the more a "calibration correction curve " is normally used. The farther back the date the
more uncertainty in the date. However carbon dating is extremely useful since it covers all the
years for which we have written history and also sound archealogical artifacts. The equipment
can be very expensive and be overa million dollars to set up an accurate laboratory.
How do we know that carbon 14 has any accuracy at all? One method of verifying is through comparison with
tree ring samples. One of the oldest species of trees in north america and also in the world is the bristlecone
pine (latin name pinus longaeva). The oldest known specimans being in the range of 4800 years old. Except on
extremely rare occasions the tree adds one growth ring per year. Simple counting of the rings from the tree
can determine its age. Scientists have confidence in the absolute age of that tree within a tiny fraction of
one percent accuracy. Material from a particular growth ring year can be extracted with a coring machine and sent
to labs for carbon dating. Thus a very accurate cross check can be made.
There are two types of carbon 14 dating technologies. The original oldest one is a multistep process and requires
sample sizes of several grams. The newer method of "Accelerator Mass spectrometer" ( AMS technology) requires smaller
sample sizes and is more accurate.The earlier process is more prone to possibility of errors in each of the many phases.
The latest technology (AMS) involves actually counting the carbon 14 atoms as they are separated from the sample.
The equipment accelerates streams of charged atomic particles to high velocities in order to sort and analyze
them. This newer method uses a much smaller sample size and can provide dates going back to maybe 100,000 at best.
Generally dates older than 70,000 are considered tentative ages.
Compare this with a dating scheme such as potassium argon dating which generally is considered accurate for
100,000 years and older. 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 once 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. For more information on this consult the article
in this link.
PROBLEMS WITH RADIOCARBON DATING
With any radiometric dating scheme certain assumptions must be made. The first assumption made is that
carbon 14 has always been produced and had the same concentration in the atmosphere. This assumption is more
important the older the carbon sample is. After 10,000 years there are no absolute calibration points such
as tree rings.
Another assumption is that radioactive decay rates stay the same and have always been what we measure them now to
be. We have only been able to measure radioactive decay rates within the last hundred years. What is the effect
of decay rates or of carbon 14 generation by a supernova. Such questions still remain incompletely answered.
One thing that is agreed upon is that if a material is claimed to be 30 million years old there should be no
carbon 14 atoms left. No matter how old the carbon material is science labs almost always find some carbon 14.
This problem has been studied at great length and the radiocarbon journal is filled with articles on the subject.
Old carbon containing materials such as coal and marble (calcium carbonate) and diamonds have been studied: These materials were from alleged multi-million year old formations and are supposed to be that old. When one carbon dates these materials they always
find some carbon 14 present. How can this be? There are several possibilities as outlined below.
They are the following.
Carbon 14 from the surrounding environment have been introduced into the sample. This could happen from ground water washing
in or bacteria invading a sample. A hard non porous carbon material such as diamond, hard coal, or amber would make
this unlikely and can be ruled out for those materials.
The carbon 14 lab has used materials in its processing that contain carbon 14. Perhaps the sample holder had some
carbon in it.
Contamination during sample preparation. This is something all labs are aware of and make great efforts to avoid this
Error due to the machine performing and measuring results. This is not likely given the extreme care given to these
many experiments by numerous people over a span of 50 years.
Nuclear synthesis of carbon 14 in situ during the experiment. This has been ruled out by experts.
Nuclear synthesis of carbon 14 in the coal or marble itself while laying in the ground for alleged millions of years.
This has been ruled out by experts as well.
Nuclear synthesis of ordinary carbon to carbon 14 while the material is in situ. In other words could the
carbon material while buried, frozen or whatever be lying next to or exposed to a strong radioactive material
that bombarded the carbon atoms and turned some of them into carbon 14 from carbon 16.
There actually is carbon 14 in the sample being tested and the dating scheme that claims the material is 100 million years
old is itself badly flawed and needs to be reexamined. The carbon 14 testing method does give a more correct and more reliable age than any other method known.
1. An excellent exhaustive study of the above problem is found in Paul Giems article in the
magazine Origins Volume 51 of 2001.
2. Use of natural diamonds to monitor C14 A.M.S. instrument backgrounds. R.E. Taylor, John Southon;
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B vol 259 (2007) Pg 282-287
3. See also Origins website.
PROBLEMS WITH OLD CARBON CONTAMINATION
The following few examples show that often carbon dating can indicate items are hundreds of years older thaney actually are. This is due to the fact that animals and man often eat items with old calcium in them. For example do you take coral calcium as a supplement? Well guess what it often comes from old long dead coral which is packaged and sold to people who supplement their diet.
The conclusion should be that true carbon dates for items can often be younger than the date given!
The shells of living mollusks have been dated using the carbon 14 method, only to find that the method gave it a date as having been dead for 23,000 years! (Science vol. 141 1963 pg. 634-637)
Shells from living snails were dated using the Carbon 14 method. The results stated that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. (Science vol. 224 1984 pg. 58-61)
A lake Bonney seal known to have died only a few weeks before was carbon dated. The results stated that the seal had died between 515 and 715 years ago. (Antarctic Journal, Washington)
What about a freshly killed seal? Well, they dated one of those too, the results stated that the seal had died 1,300 years ago. (Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct 1971 pg. 211)
1. The reservoir effect by Beta Analytic: reservoir effect website.
2. Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct 1971 pg. 211
3. Science vol. 224 1984 pg. 58-61
4. Science vol. 141 1963 pg. 634-637
5. carbon dating website.
DATING OF DINOSAUR BONES
RADIOCARBON DATING OF BONE
Carbon 14 dating of bone is one of the most difficult tasks for carbon dating and requires the most
care of any carbonaceous material. This is mainly due to the nature of bone which is a very porous material.
Certain parts of bone look like a sponge under microscopic examination. Many dinosaur bones
are hard as rock because the original material has been replaced with silicon materials such as quartz. We have
found un-mineralized dinosaur bones. We can then scrape the outer surface off to get rid of surface contamination
and date the inner remaining material. Depending on other factors one can choose to date just the purified bioapatite, total organics or
collagen. One can also date all three components as was done by us (see chart below).
The discovery of collagen in a Tyrannosaurus-Rex dinosaur femur bone was recently reported in the journal
SCIENCE. This is an outstanding find because collagen being a soft tissue present in most animals is supposed to
decay in a few thousand years. Collagen is the main protein found in connective tissue of animals. It can make up
as much as 1 to 6 percent of muscle mass. Recently Triceratops and Hadrosaur femur bones in excellent condition were
discovered in Glendive Montana and our group received permission to saw them in half and collect samples for Carbon 14 testing.
Both bones were tested by a licensed lab for presence of collagen. Both bones did in fact contain some
collagen! The best process ( Accelerator Mass Spectrometry ) was used. Total organic carbon and dinosaur
bio-apatite was then extracted and pretreated to remove potential contaminants and concordant radiocarbon dates were
obtained, all of which were similar to radiocarbon dates for ice age megafauna such as Siberian mammoths, saber tooth tigers of the Los Angeles LaBrea Tarpits, sloth dung and giant bison.
We generally go with AMS dating because of its inherent superior accuracy but use the conventional method when large samples are available to completely rule out contamination. This is recommended by the professional carbon dating laboratory specialists.
The following should be noted. Our group has radiocarbon dated mammoth and mastodon bones in the
range of 23,560 to 36,000 years BP, and none of them contained any collagen. Yet some dinosaur bones contain
collagen. We believe the absence of collagen depends on burial environment. Bones buried in sand with water
generally have only bio-apatite remaining which is still datable. Dry or cold environments and or regions of individual bones free of cracks and
bones buried in clay stand a better chance of containing collagen.
Dr. Libby the discoverer of Radiocarbon dating and Nobel Prize winner showed that purified collagen
could not give erroneous ages. Dr Stafford's research demonstrated in 1990 that conventional methods of purifying
collagen were within 5% of the most excruciatingly exact extraction techniques. It is not possible to claim that the
laboratories made mistakes in their analysis and that there really was no collagen. General scientific thought says
dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago. We have evidence to the contrary from several sources. Radiocarbon
dating of dinosaur bones, accounts from ancient histories, depictions on rocks, mozaics, and temple walls; and
human footprints with dinosaurs strongly show that dinosaurs were around in historical times. More on these subjects
are included in our other web pages.
Dinosaur bones from Texas to Alaska have been tested by our group for the presence of Carbon 14 and the following table shows some
of the results of our findings over the years.
AMS: is the Accelerated Mass Spectrometer method of counting each atom. $550/sample
C: Conventional C-14 decay method, generally less accurate than AMS. $350/sample
CL: long count conventional C-14 dating $400/sample. (additional each sample.)
± means plus or minus in years which suggests a range of ages.
Bio-apatite: Calcium carbonate which has replaced phosphate of bone during life-time.
Charred bone is description of lab personnel because of blackened bone surfaces.
Modified Longin Method: The normal purification method for bone collagen.
Collagen: Protein which can be as high as 20 % in normal bone but decomposes over
time so that there should be none after ~100,000 years. Yet it is found in four foot long, nine inch diameter dinosaur femur bones supposedly claimed as fact to be >65 Million years old.
16,220 +/- 220
Collagen, modified Longin Method, AMS
Organics, pretreated acid, alkali, acid,CL
Organics, pretreated acid, alkali, acid.CL
Organics, pretreated acid, alkali, acid,AMS
Collagen Modified longin method.AMS
Humic acid alkali fraction,AMS
Bio-apatite (purified with HAc),AMS
Internal bone material
Outer bone material
Internal bone material
Outer bone material
Internal bone material
Internal bone material
Internal bone material
Internal bone material
bone surface scraping
very large sample size
Table 1. Results of testing for C-14 in dinosaur bones
from Texas to Alaska
Table 1. Los Rsultados de las pruebas del carbono catorce in huesos de dinosaurios de Tejas a Alaska
BELOW ARE THE DATA TABULATIONS USED IN PALEOS POSTER SESSIONS AT CONFERENCES AND CONVENTIONS FOR THE EDUCATION OF MAIN STREAM SCIENTISTS WHO ACTUALLY PRACTICE THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF RESEARCH AND ARE NOT INTIMIDATED WITH NEW IDEAS.
these scientists to cross-check the data below by C-14 dating dinosaur bones from their bone repositories and museums and then report the results. Thats how the true scientific method works.
C-14 Years B.P.
25,750 ± 280
23,760 ± 270
29,690 ± 90
30,640 ± 90
31,360 ± 100
31,050 + 230/-220
36,480 + 560/-530
24,340 ± 70
39,230 ± 140
30,110 ± 80
1950 ± 50 (contam)
Acro (Acrocanthosaurus) is a carnivorous dinosaur excavated in 1984 near Glen Rose TX by C. Baugh and G. Detwiler; in 108 MA Cretaceous sandstone identified by Dr. W. Langston of Un. of TX at Austin.
Allosaurus is a carnivorous dinosaur excavated in 1989 by J. Hall, A Murray team and under a Brontosaurus skeleton in the Wildwood section on a ranch west of Grand Junction CO in 150 Ma Late Jurassic sandstone of the Morrison formation - identified by using Allosaurus bone handbook submitted by local museum curator.
Hadrosaur #1, a duck billed dinosaur bone fragments excavated in 1994 along Colville River by G. Detwiler, J. Whitmore team in the famous Liscomb, bone bed of Alaskan North Slope validated by Dr. J. Whitmore.
Hadrosaur #2, a duck billed dinosaur lone femur bone excavated in 2004 in clay in the NW ¼, NE ¼ of Sec. 32, T16N, R56 E, Dawson County, Montana by O. Kline team of the Glendive Dinosaur and Fossil Museum identified by paleontology descriptions and sawed open by O. Kline, H. Miller team in 2005 to retrieve samples for testing for C-14 content.
Triceratops #1, a ceratopsid dinosaur lone femur bone excavated in 2004 in Cretaceous clay at 47º 6 18 by 104º 39 22 Montana by O. Kline team of the Glendive MT Dinosaur & Fossil Museum identified by paleontology descriptions and sawed open by O. Kline, H. Miller team in 2005 to retrieve samples for testing for C-14 content.
Triceratops #2, a very large ceratopsid-type dinosaur excavated in 2007 in Cretaceous clay at is 47' 02" 44N and 104' 32" 49W by O. Kline team of Glendive Dinosaur & Fossil Museum identified by paleontology descriptions but may be a new species; outer bone fragments of femur tested for C-14.
Hadrosaur #3, scrapings from a duck billed dinosaur large bone, excavated by Joe Taylor of Mt Blanco Fossil Museum, Crosbyton TX in Colorado in Cretaceous strata identified by Joe Taylor.
Apatosaur, scrapings from a rib still imbedded in the clay soil of a ranch in CO, partially excavated in 2007 and 2009 in 150 Ma late Jurassic strata by C. Baugh and B. Dunkel - identified by C. Baugh.
Lab ID: All specimens from USA unless otherwise noted.
GX is Geochron Labs Cambrdge MA, USA; AA is University of Arizona Tuscon AZ, USA; UG is University of Georgia, Athens GA, USA; KIA is Christian Albrechts Universität, Kiel Germany; AMS is Accelerated Mass Spectrometer; Beta is the conventional method of counting Beta decay particles; Bio is carbonate fraction of bioapatite. Bow is bulk organic fraction of whole bone; Col is collagen fraction; w or ext is charred, exterior or whole bone fragments; Hum is humic acids.
Weight of samples:
Sample size sent to RC lab, 170 g as required by Geochron in 1990 for GX-15155, conventional beta
Sample size sent to RC lab, excess CO2 from GX-15155 encapsulated in glass and sent to NZ lab, AMS
Sample size sent to RC lab, 50 mg as scrapings from different Acro bone for AA-5786, AMS
Sample size sent to RC lab, 6.4 g from femur for UGAMS-7509a & b, AMS
Sample size sent to RC lab, 30 g for UGAMS-02947, AMS
Sample size sent to RC lab, 5 g for KIA-5523, AMS
Sample size sent to RC lab, 8.4 g for GX-32372-Internal bone material, AMS
Sample size sent to RC lab, 146 g for GX-32647-Outer bone material, conventional beta
Sample size sent to RC lab, 2.3 g for GX-31950-Internal bone material, AMS
Sample size sent to RC lab, 160 g for GX-32678-AMS & GX-32739-Outer bone, Conventional beta
Contam is Contaminant in collagen fraction; it could be humic acids or an unknown but it was removed
by acid - base - acid pretreatment and was only 1.3% of collagen sample in UGAMS-01918. In GX-31950 the contaminant overwhelmed the collagen as the sample was too small which is a good reason for extracting and dating other fractions and submitting large samples. This femur bone was found along a dry wash.
C-14 Years B.P.
22,830 ± 90
28,550 ± 110
22,020 ± 50
4,070 ± 25
TABLE 3. C-14 ages for a Rhinoceros and a Dinosaur from the Gobi Desert and
Mosasaur from the Institut Royal des Sciences Royalles de Belgique
TABLA DE TRES: carbono catorce edades de los Dinosaurs, Rhinocerous y mosasaur.
(a)Rhinoceros: There are many species of Rhino. This was a skull bone fragment from a long necked one.
Psittacosaurus: It is about the size of a sheep. We C-14-dated a 16.4 gram section of a tail bone shown in Figure 1
but we need to obtain cleaner specimens like was proposed to paleontologist Jack Horner of the Museum
of the Rockies, Bozeman MT for a cooperative research project. The Mosasaur was tested for carbon and C-14
content after acid-base-acid pretreatment Google C-14 in Mosasaur. [From the Institut Royal des
Sciences Royalles de Belgique]
(b) UGAMS is University of Georgia, Athens Georgia; Lund is Lund University, Lund Sweden; Bio is carbonate fraction of bone bioapatite collected under vacuum as CO2; carb is absorbed carbonates from burial environment removed with acetic acid under vacuum as CO2 and then dated as a contaminant.
(c) pmC is percent of modern C-14 based on half life of 5,730 +/- 40 years before the present
FIGURE 1. Tail bone sections of a Psittacosaurus from Gobi desert, China.
submitted by Mt Blanco Fossil Museum, Crosbyton TX for C-14 dating. One of the
two sections was pretreated several times with organic solvents to remove glue
and preservatives and then AMS C-14 dated yielding an age of 22,020 ± 50 years BP.
More chronology C-14 research has been proposed for Chinese dinosaurs to main
Stream scientists but they have ignored our suggestions for such joint projects.
FIGURE 2. Flow chart for processing dinosaur bone samples using the AMS technology. The amount of bone for crushing could vary from lab to lab and sample to sample. Bones for the conventional or Beta method would be processed similarly but with much larger many gram samples that counts only the atomic disintegrations thus giving with much less ± precision.
DATING OF FOSSIL WOOD, BONE, IVORY, AMBER AND SOIL SUBMITTED BY THE PALEO GROUP FOR RC DATING AT FOUR LAB
(1) Charcoal in Cretaceous clay (Carbonized), TX, USA A-4856-Beta, 09/28/1987. 37,480 +2950/-
2140, and 37,420 +8120/-3430, 0/14/1990; --clay as young as 5000 and up to 50,000 years, says a clay expert (Devilbiss, J. Private communication, 1987), Hugh Miller and Dr. John DeVilbiss collectors
(2) Carbonized wood in Cretaceous limestone-Paluxy River TX, GX-31367-AMS, >49,900, 02/02/2006;
Calcite in the rock could have aged the wood extracted from limestone above the clay, H. Miller
(3) Coalified wood attached to petrified wood-CO, GX-31730-AMS, 44,200 ±2100, 06/01/2005; the bark
apparently resisted mineralization but not coalification , pmC = 0.41; Bill White and Joe Guthrie.
(4) Unfossilized wood, 36 m depth in a core, N. Slope-AK, GX-30816-AMS, 43,380 ± 380, 03/26/2004;
This wood was removed from a 0.6 meter diameter log and was cut off manually by the geologist. He
had inspected the 6 meter diameter core hole to be used for dumping oil drilling waste and was at
the bottom after confirming the uniformity of temperature was at -5oC when he viewed the log.
(5) Wood from mammoth burial site, Fairbanks, AK, GX-30817-AMS, 2510 ± 50, 03/26/2004; The date
could be too young for a mammoth burial site so more RC research is needed, Joe Taylor, submitter.
(6) Collagen from mammoth ivory, TX, GX31138-AMS, 4960 ± 70, 10/12/2004; the purpose was to
learn how much collagen could be obtained from ancient ivory (0.2 mg is poorly preserved and therefore considered not a valid RC age), Joe Taylor submitter.
(7) Ellef Ringnes Island mummified wood GX30932-AMS, >45,70014C years BP, 08/03/04 Canada Dr. charles
Felix of Abilene Christian College, collector.
(8) Ellef Ringnes Island mummified wood KIA-14899-AMS, 52,820 + 3680/-2510; the pmC was
only 0.14 ± 0.05, about the same as some diamonds and coal. 10/10/2001; humic acid fraction 17,580
± 90 BP, corrected pmC 11.21 ± 0.12, Canada, Prof. Dr. Charles Felix, TX oil geologist, collector.
(9) Mammoth-TX, CO3 of bioapatite, UGAMS-02684-AMS, 37,700 ± 210 years BP, pmC 1.08 ± 0.03,
01/22/2008; no collagen so only carbonate fraction of bioapatite was dated, Joe Taylor, collector.
(10) Mastodon-TX, CO3 of bioapatite, UGAMS-02766-AMS, 23,360 ± 100 years BP, pmC 5.11 ± 0.07,
02/25/2008; no collagen so only carbonate fraction of bioapatie was dated, Joe Taylor, collector.
(11) Lignite lens-MT, Cretaceous, UGAMS-02442-AMS, 12.78 % carbon, 42,560 ± 340, pmC 0.52 ±
0.02, 12/17/2007. The lignite sample was 200 feet above wood from the fern tree #11, Otis Kline
(12) Fern tree wood, in Cretaceous clay, Glendive MT, GX-32371-AMS, 45,190 + 9300/-4200,
03/16/2006. This sample was taken 200 feet below the location of the lignite of (10) on the Dinosaur
and Fossil Museum research station containing many fossils, Hugh Miller & Bill White collectors
(13) Soil surrounding Triceratops femur #1, UGAMS-02442-AMS, 19,820 ± 80, pmC 8.49 ±0.08,
12/17/2007. The RC date was older than expected and demonstrates the original soil in which the Triceratops was buried had not become appreciably contaminated with younger material; this adds more confidence for the RC age of the dinosaur bones being free of contamination and not being millions of years in age, Otis Kline collector.
(14) Amber from Wyoming Triceratops burial site strata in Lance formation, Saxony and Russia at > 46,450,
49,210 and 51,900 years BP; pmCs 0.15, 0.08, 0.04; d13C -24.06, `22.11, -21.88; KIA 2963, 2961, 2962,
respectively 10/31/97, H. Miller collector (WY), Maciej Giertych.
OBJECTIONS TO DATING DINOSAUR BONES
A typical reaction to our dating of dinosaur bones is exemplified by the following article submitted to the Columbus Dispatch in November of 1991.
Columbus Dispatch, The (OH)
November 3, 1991
CREATIONISTS SAY DINOSAURS LIVED WITH MAN
Author: Michael B. Lafferty, Dispatch Science Reporter
A Columbus creation science group says Soviet tests confirm dinosaurs and humans were contemporaries as recently as 10,000 years ago, some 66 million years after dinosaurs were supposedly eliminated in a mass extinction.
Soviet scientists Dmitri Kouznetsov and Andrey Ivanov said the tests showed samples of dinosaur bones were 9,800 to 30,000 years old. Ivanov, a researcher at Moscow State University, used a technique called laser mass spectroscopy, which measures small quantities of chemicals, to analyze samples of the bones.
"This method is far from ideal. We're not sure of the absolute age. But we are sure of the coexistence of Asian man and dinosaurs," said Kouznetsov, a biochemist and a supporter of the concept of creationism.
Creation science holds that the literal, biblical account of creation can be scientifically verified and that humans did not evolve, or change gradually, from simpler, more primitive organisms over 4.5 billion years.
A leading critic of creationist theory called the reported findings "ludicrous" and said the creationists used testing methods inappropriate for fossils.
"Either we're going to live in the same world or go for any piece of bunk," said Leonard Krishtalka, curator of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh. "No matter what date they claim, the dinosaurs died out 66 million years ago."
Investigators at the University of Arizona, who tested some of the samples at the request of local creationists, said their results do not represent the true age of the fossils.
Creationists, however, are elated with the Soviets' findings as well as the Arizona data which, they say, confirms their beliefs. They are undeterred by the skepticism.
"We have knocked 100 million years off the age of the dinosaurs," said Hugh Miller, leader of the Creation Research Education Science Foundation, which arranged the testing and a visit to Columbus for the Soviet scientists last week.
The Soviets used bone fragments of a dozen dinosaurs obtained from finds in Texas and Colorado and from the collection at the Carnegie Museum, Miller said.
The data is one more attack by believers of creationist theory on the theory of evolution, which has provided the fundamental underpinnings of modern biology. Mainline scientists believe dinosaurs evolved about 200 million years ago before dying in a mass extinction about 65 million or 66 million years ago.
A cataclysm fits with a closely held belief of creationists - Noah's flood, which Miller believes occurred 10,000 to 30,000 years ago.
Miller, a former chemist and chemical equipment salesman who says he earns his living as a chemical consultant, contacted Kouznetsov in 1989 after reading a biochemistry article he wrote. Kouznetsov put Miller in contact with Ivanov.
"There is censorship in the American scientific community resenting any attempt to rock the boat," Miller said. "We expect other scientists to check us out."
Two of the specimens were obtained from bones of an acrocanthosaurus recovered by creationist researchers near Glen Rose, Texas, and of an allosaurus from near Grand Junction, Colo.
Because many scientists are skeptical of creationist theory, Miller obtained some bone samples and the corroborative testing by disguising the nature of the creationist science group. He obtained a dozen samples from the Carnegie Museum in in 1990.
Miller said carbon-14 dating at the University of Arizona, conducted on specimens submitted between August 1990 and October 1991, agreed with the Soviet testing.
The group also arranged the Arizona testing by not revealing its origins.
Austin Long, professor of geosciences at the university, confirmed the tests were performed in his lab but said he was not aware the material was dinosaur bones.
Robert Kalin, senior research specialist in Long's lab, said Miller's samples did not contain any collagen, the fibrous connective tissue of bones and the source of carbon in old bones, but he dated the samples anyway. Kalin believes the carbon-14 test results show the age of dust and other debris on the fossils but not the age of the fossils.
If carbon was found in the fossils, Krishtalka said, it most likely came from dust, dirt and the shellac preservative with which the specimens were likely preserved when they were acquired by the museum in the 19th century.
"Carbon dating dinosaur bones is ludicrous, and the fact they yielded numbers is meaningless," Krishtalka said.
While paleontologists use several methods in dating, part of the disparity rests in the need for researchers to make some assumptions about the gross age of bones so the appropriate test method can be used. Carbon-14 dating and mass spectroscopy dating are best for specimens up to 50,000 years or so, Long said.
If a scientist believes the bones are millions of years older, then the usual procedure is to date the age of the surrounding rock strata using potassium argon dating, uranium dating or strontium dating, all of which measure the amount of decay of those elements.
The creationist claim also attacks a fundamental tenet of geology, that older rock strata are overlaid by younger, more recent strata.
Miller also attacked that bedrock law of geology. He said it is possible for younger sediment to occur at lower levels than older sediment. This phenomenon, Miller believes, could account for the recovery of a human foot imprint in sediment below that containing dinosaur bones at the Glen Rose site worked by organization members.
But Krishtalka at the Carnegie Museum said the only way for older rocks to overlay younger rocks is for the sediments to be overturned as a result of mountain building or some similar process.
"That's like asking how I could lie down on the bed and have the mattress end up on top of me," he said. Krishtalka also said the Glen Rose footprint was proved to be a hoax. "Even the creationists, at least the more reputable ones, admit that."
Miller reacted angrily. "I deny that vehemently. He's relying on past information and misinformation. All the work from 1982 on has been done with dozens of witnesses."
"If dinosaurs were alive 10,000 years ago," Krishtalka said, "then they should occur in the same sediment as mastodons and mammoths. We should find saber-toothed cats. They should be in the same rocks as humans."
The gulf separating the two camps is immense. "Let them go to their museum basements and scrape the bones and send them out for testing," Miller said in answer to the criticism.
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH Copyright (c) 1991 The Dispatch Printing Co.
Record Number: 9111030053
Page: 01BNovember 3, 1991
CREATIONISTS SAY DINOSAURS LIVED WITH MAN
Author: Michael B. Lafferty, Dispatch Science Reporter
RESPONSE TO ERRORS AND CRITICISMS IN COLUMBUS (OH) DISPATCH ARTICLE, CREATIONISTS SAY DINOSAURS LIVED WITH MAN NOVEMBER 3, 1991
1 Creation science is a belief system just as is Evolutionary Science. As scientists we believe that a supreme being created the universe and life. HOWEVER WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE LITERAL, BIBLICAL ACCOUNT OF CREATION CAN BE SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIED as suggested in the Dispatch. Neither camp can prove how we got here; we can only believe one way or the other and perhaps show which belief system is more reasonable in light of scientific data. What our dating shows is simply that the long ages for the sedimentary rock strata and dinosaur existence is pure mythology; and, implies that all life forms appeared suddenly. If dinosaurs and humans coexisted in time as both Russian and American data demonstrates then the theory of biological evolution in untenable and should not be taught as a fact or even as a good theory.
2 The testing methods used by the University of Arizona and the other labs is radiocarbon dating one of the most reliable and respected dating methods known to man; it is far superior to the other radiometric dating methods such as Uranium-lead and potassium argon which are subject to far more assumptions and solubility problems in the sedimentary rock strata. Our team suggests to the scientific community and the public in general that it makes much better sense to DATE THE FOSSILS IN THE ROCKS IF AT ALL POSSIBLE THAN TO USE UNRELIABLE LONG-AGE RADIOMETRIC TECHNIQUES. We think the general public and level headed scientists would agree to our approach to dating fossils using radiocarbon-14. We think that the museum curator shows a mean-spirited attitude towards ones fellow scientists in light of the fact that all the fossil dinosaur bones we dated were carbonized.
3 We think that it is very unscientific to call the research of other scientists bunk until one can repeat the experimental work himself. All the curator of the Carnegie Museum needs to do is to send some bone fragments out for dating at a radiocarbon dating laboratory as we did. The chemical treatments that the bone fragments go through before dating preclude any dust, dirt and preservative contamination (thats why we paid $300 to $500/ sample). We would like to test some more bone fragments ourselves. Would Leonard Krishtalka care to provide us with more??? We would send them to different labs to provide more credibility. Scrapings can also be used.
4 The curators remark that no matter what date they claim, the dinosaurs died out 66 million years ago is tantamount to the scientific community of Galileos time saying, No matter that Galileo has proven that the earth rotates around the sun, the sun still moves around the earth.
5 When I was quoted as saying, Noahs flood, which Miller believes occurred 10,000 to 30,000 years ago should have read, 10,000 to 30,000 radiocarbon years ago. This is an important distinction which the reporter failed to record. There is ample evidence, even from Dr. Libbys writings, (Nobel Prize winner and inventor of C-14 dating) that radiocarbon (RC) dates could be way-to-old (when in the 20,000 to 30,000 RC year range); this is open to interpretations but one thing is definitely clear, Our paleochronology group dated both carbonized wood and carbonized dinosaur bones from the period of geological history called the Cretaceous and Jurassic which is in the range of 100 million to 150 million years ago by evolutionary assumptions. Therefore, both rock and bone were 1000 x younger than evolutionary geological assumptions. According to Dr. Libby [discoverer of C-14 technology and Nobel Prize winner in physics] both bone and wood whether burnt or carbonized are the most reliable substances for RC dating.
6 Disguising the nature of our group implies we were some undesirable persons trying to sneak some bones away from the museum to do some diabolical trick. We told Dr. Berman (in writing) exactly what our purpose was, namely to see if we could detect some carbon on the surface of the blackened bones in the museum basement; we gave Dr. Berman a written report dated 4-26-90 describing our results and the chemical cleaning procedure used to ensure accurate results. We were testing the hypothesis that all blackened dinosaur ones were coated with carbon and if so we theorized tht they may have been killed during a major catastrophe possibly initiated by asteroid impaction in water and on the land masses. The dinosaurs would then have been buried with their flesh intact under mountains of sediment that caused much carbonization to take place on the bone surfaces. As a result of our initial test he [Dr. Berman] gave us bone fragments from eight more dinosaurs. Only after we were satisfied that our hypothesis had much merit did we send several bones away for dating. Incidentally, and most interesting, DINOSAUR BONES FROM RUSSIA, SIBERIA AND ARGENTINA ALSO SHOW EVIDENCE OF BLACKENED DINOSAUR BONES. Could there have been one or more major world-wide catastrophes that hit the earth only thousands of years ago? Our dating suggests YES. We only ask that others double check our results. IF CORRECT THEN THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD SHOULD INITIATE AN EXTENSIVE MONITORING OF ASTEROIDS. THE EARTH MAY BE IN FAR MORE DANGER THAN ANYONE HAS EVER IMAGINED.
7 We did not reveal the origins of the bones [to RC dating labs] because we were not asked to do so. We think that is an excellent policy and the University of Arizona should be complimented. We hope to continue to use their good services just as soon as we can raise more funds which, by-the-way,is very difficult to do. Another good reason for not revealing the bone origins was the fact that when another member of our team told one lab that it was dinosaur bone he refused to date it [too old] thus holding up our team effort for his dinosaur for four more years.
8 We agree with Bob Kalin that the bones did not contain any collagen; we suspect the reason for this is that when buried under tons of sediments the carbonization process eliminated the collagen but of course not the radiocarbon-14 isotope which would have remained on the carbonized surfaces etc. Scientists have found some organic compounds in the bones of the largest dinosaur in the world, the Seismosaurus, however.
9 This is only a bedrock of geology because evolutionary geologists ignored studies in 1895 that showed that geologists can not determine the age of the rock strata by its position in the geologic column; all you can really say is that the sedimentary rock was laid down as a function of particle size and the density of the material [in moving waters]. Recent research in both France and the United States has confirmed the 1895 observations. I did not say that this phenomenon accounts for human footprints in a layer under a top stratum containing dinosaur footprints. What exist in Texas along the Paluxy River are human footprints in the same second stratum with dinosaur footprints. The top stratum in the 300 foot long shelf where the excavations have been occurring, contains one set of dinosaur footprints (five in sequence no human prints). These are the facts not mere conjecture.
10 See above.
11 There have been footprints of the cat family with dinosaur along the Paluxy river, TX as well as some other possible anomalies. There also have been horse footprints found in Russia and Arizona in dinosaur age rocks. Modern evolutionary scientists have been mystified by such discoveries and simply ignore them or put them in their basement closet until they can offer a better explanation that will fit the evolutionary theory. ONE OF THE MAJOR REPORTS WHICH THEY SUCCESSFULLY PIGEONHOLED WAS THE OAKLAND MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY REPORT SHOWING THAT DINOSAUR AND HUMANS HAVE COEXISTED TOGEHER BASED ON DISCOVERIES OF PETROGLYPTHS ETC. THIS IS AN INTOLERABLE WAY TO CONDUCT SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS INTO ORIGINS.
(See www.kolbecenter.org or www.earthage.org for the Oakland Museum report.
NOTE: Words in parenthesis were added for clarity in this rebuttal and are numbered based upon key points found in the Dispatch article).
Hugh R. Miller
Now fast forward to 2011. Has any scientist believing in the evolutionary hypothesis actually RC dated dinosaur bones during the intervening 20 years since 1991? Absolutely not! As noted in our web site the new lab where we have sent bones of dinosaurs and mammals have extracted collagen and dated both the collagen and the calcium carbonate fractions and obtained concordant RC ages which confirmed our data from 1990. We then urged American and Chinese paleontologists to RC date their dinosaur bones as we did in 1990 so here is those results.
Dr. Mary Schweitzer in her article in Scientific American entitled, Blood from Stone, December 2010 says: EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS, as the old adage goes, require EXTRAORDINARY evidence. Careful scientists make every effort to disprove cherished hypotheses before they accept that their ideas are correct. Thus, for the past 20 years I have been trying every experiment I can think of to disprove the hypothesis that the materials my collaborators and I have discovered are components of soft tissues from dinosaurs and other long-gone animals. Why did she perform these extraordinary experiments? Answer: To show that soft tissue and collagen could last 65 million or more years in their original structure than the current hypothesis of 100,000 years maximum. She ignored suggestions from fellow scientists that her tests were incomplete until she tested for C-14 content of these bones. Specifically, the Glendive Dinosaur and Fossil Museum director challenged her in a letter to do just that as his museum had done; she ignored his official letter request. Another expert on C-14 dating also challenged her by e-mail to which she replied, Not now.
That above adage Extraordinary claims ----- was attributed to another evolutionist, Carl Sagen, in an article by Dr. John Barnard president of the research institute at nationwide childrens Hospital in Columbus OH, January 23, 2011 page C3 RE Sham study - a blight on autism research where millions of dollars have been wasted on trying to determine if the original research could be validated concerning the effect of Vaccines causing autism among children. Whether valid criticism or not the new studies claim that the original study was fraudulent [no proper control group; important observations not made in a blinded fashion --- no link has been found between the vaccine and autism].
Mary, Mary quite contrary has done a marvelous job of applying her molecular biological knowledge to the study of dinosaur bones. She has indeed proven that such organic chemicals have indeed survived in some dinosaur bones. BUT until she tests for the presence of C-14 in these organic chemicals such as for collagen her research showing that such chemicals can last 65 million years or more is as much a sham as that of the report on connecting vaccines to autism. She has missed C-14 testing, the simplest, relatively inexpensive and most obvious experiment that would explain why there was soft tissue, red blood cells and collagen remaining in these various dinosaur bones namely that the conventional hypothesis that soft tissue and large organic molecules degrade within 30,000 to 100,000 years.
Why then didnt she test for C-14 content? If she had found NO C-14 then her case becomes much stronger. What is she and other believers in evolutionism who we have challenged afraid of? The apparent reasons are: (1) If she had found C-14 then she would be the one to blow the whistle on the evolution of man (2) But if she found C-14 as might be expected she could lose her status and for that matter her job even if she found a publication that would report it.
Is Mary Schweitzer alone in ignoring such a simple and relatively inexpensive testing of fossils for C-14? No, not at all! She is just one among many scientists who must cow-toe to the evolutionary hypothesis of origins to keep their funding and job alive. Evolutionism is a multi-billion dollar year business. She as with other evolutionists, whether atheistic or theistic have been distracted from searching for truth in science by allegiance to EVOLUTIONISM thats the religion that requires its adherents to believe that evolution was responsible for the changes from one species to another rather than Abrupt Appearance of all species.
FAMOUS FOSSILS THAT SHOULD BE TESTED FOR C-14
CONTENT & DATED
Below is a list of other extraordinary discoveries that are crying to heaven for C-14 testing.
Leonardo the Mummy dinosaurthe worlds best preserved dinosaur --
Horner/Schweitzers T Rex and Hadrosaur containing soft tissue and collagen
Chinese dinosaurs and mammals from Gobi Desert and 400 KM from Peijing
British squid ink from 200 M years BP
Antarctic fish bone bed
Ancient Arctic forest on Ellesmere Island 2M to 8 M years BP [NSF-Amer Geo Union
December 16, 2010, Columbus Dispatch December 17th 2010]
Core samples of un-fossilized trees from Prudhoe Bay up to at least 2000 feet in depth.
Presumably in core repositories from oil well drill holes in government, university and oil well companies.
Jane the almost intact dinosaur at the Burbee Seeds Museum of Natural history
Ashley bone beds of Charleston SC. containing Hadrosaur, mammoth, marine bones and
human bones together www.genesis
Colville River Hadrosaur bone beds
Our CRSEF team in 1994 performed this expedition -- one dino bone fragment containing a small % of nitrogen which is indicative of collagen was 31,050 +230-/-220 RC years BP but only reported by hugoc14 using German lab as arranged by myself and Dr. Giertych. Interestingly, the date was same as for collagen from Triceratops from Montana and for the Allosaur re-dated in 2008
Then in 2002 dinsaur bones discovered at the ends of the earth:
THIS CARTOON SUMMARIZES WHAT WE ARE SAYING ON THIS WEB SITE: DINOSAURS, MAMMALS AND MAN ALL LIVED TOGETHER - PROBABLY IN PERHAPS OVERLAPPING ENVIRONMENTS AS THEY TRIED TO AVOID EACH OTHER.
Origins Vol. 51: 6-30 2001 Carbon-14 Content of Fossil Carbon
Lindgren J, Uvdal P, Engdahl A, Lee AH, Alwmark C, et al. (2011) Microspectroscopic Evidence of Cretaceous Bone Proteins. PLoS ONE 6(4): e19445. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019445
1) The stratigraphic or geologic column (GC) is dated conventionally by 19th century assumptions of 1000's of years for a few cm. of sediment to form and lithify [harden] into rock. It is dated with radioactive isotopes and with the assumption that the simplest life forms were formed at the bottom of the GC and then life became more complicated after millions of years.
2) Dating strata by the location and depth in the strata is circular reasoning that is not verified by numerous measurements. We can C14 date many of the fossils and sometimes we even date the age of the carbon containing rocks that encase the fossil.
3) Sedimentary rocks are NOT datable by non C14 radiometric methods as they contain no radioactive decay elements.
4) Experimental sedimentology in large hydraulic flumes indicates that strata can form rapidly including mudstones.
"It was not until 1999 that there seemed to be an awakening to the idea that geological ages are measured by the time taken for sediments to deposit and not by biological revolutions or orogeny. Prof. Gabriel Gohau of the French Geological Society confirmed this fact in his book A History of Geology (1999):
« Ce qui mesure le temps, ce sont les durées de sédimentation, sur lesquelles tout le monde est plus ou moins daccord, et non celles des orogenèses et des « révolutions » biologiques. »
(Translation: Time is measured by the time taken for sediments to deposit, a fact upon which everybody is more or less agreed, and not by orogenesis or biological revolutions)
Prof. Gohau mentioned in his work how Charles Lyell was influenced in the construction of the geological time scale by his belief in biological « revolutions» (macro-evolution) occurring over 240 millions of years.
**************RECENT PRESS RELEASE FOR AGU CONVENTION************************
DINOSAURS ARE NOT NEARLY AS OLD AS WE THOUGHT! RECENT SCIENTIFIC STUDIES, INCLUDING C-14 DATING OF THEIR BONES, SHOW THAT DINOSAURS ARE ONLY 1000âS OF YEARS OLD. DISCOVERIES IN GEOLOGY, GENETICS AND ARCHAEOLOGY ARE IN APPARENT AGREEMENT. MANY SCIENTISTS ARE DEMANDING THAT MORE RESEARCH BE DONE TO DETERMINE HOW AND WHY THESE REPTILES BECAME EXTINCT SO RECENTLY. THE IMPLICATIONS OF SUCH A RECENT DINOSAUR EXTINCTION ARE QUITE PROFOUND. IN A WORD THESE DISCOVERIES HELP TO SHATTER THE EVOLUTIONARY PARADIGM OF MODERN SCIENCE. IS IT ANY WONDER THE SCIENTIFIC ESTABLISHMENT HAS WORKED STRENUOUSLY TO SUPPRESS AND/OR IGNORE THIS EVIDENCE?
SAN FRANCISCO, CA, DECEMBER 5, 2011: A highly skilled and experienced team of researchers attending the Dec. 5-9, 2011 American Geophysical Union (AGU) convention in San Francisco will present solid evidence indicating the alleged 65 million years between dinosaurs and man do not exist. Direct C14 dating of bone collagen and/or other bone fractions of six dinosaurs from Texas to Alaska has yielded ages in the 1000s of years. The team will urge attending scientists to test for C14 in other dinosaur and marine reptiles to see if this discovery is a worldwide phenomenon, as it now appears. PowerPoint presentations and poster boards of the data will be ongoing Monday 6-9 PM, and Tuesday and Wednesday 10 AM to 10 PM, at the Intercontinental Hotel next to Moscone Convention Hall (suite registered under Paleo GP).
Representing a collective 90 years in the study of dinosaur and other fossils, on hand to present the data will be Joe Taylor, paleontologist and fossil museum director from Texas; Hugh Owen, teacher and lecturer from Virginia; research chemist Hugh Miller; and engineer Bill White of Ohio.
On behalf of other team members from the USA, France, Italy, Germany, Poland and Russia, and with their support, Taylor et al have C14 dated bone collagen whenever there was sufficient material to extract (from four different dinosaurs). The team has also dated in-situ bone carbonate and/or total organics from seven dinosaurs from Texas to Alaska. Concordant C14 ages were obtained from the different fractions in the low tens of thousands of years, using both Accelerated Mass Spectrometer (AMS) and Beta decay methodologies. (The maximum age range for detecting C14 is 50,000 to 80,000 years.)
Similar C-14 results were also obtained by a Swedish-American team that 14C dated a Cretaceous marine reptile, a Mosasaurus, and for early-Cretaceous Psittacosaurus bones from China. Recent restudies of two dinosaurs dated in the 1000's of years in 1990 also confirmed that those C14 ages were accurate. In all of these tests strict scientific protocol was followed and the normal pretreatments were used to remove possible contaminants, such as preservatives, fungus, bacteria and humic acids, before dating. These data also explain why expert scientists are correct in asserting that residual collagen and soft tissue found in dinosaurs by lab experiments should only last 1000's of years not 65 million or more. (cf : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hhsx80P1PQ&feature=related )
Since our presentation was denied open access to fellow AGU members by a papers committee, we are strongly encouraging conference attendees and media representatives to visit our suite at the Intercontinental Hotel for data for ongoing presentations and discussion on Monday 6-9 PM, and Tuesday and Wednesday 10 AM to 10 PM. We will also present compelling evidence for the thesis that the real ages of tested specimens could be even less than the C14 ages we have obtained because of the Suess effect.
Exclusion of important data is simply not the way legitimate scientific research is conducted. Such exclusion is unacceptable for any honest scientist. Since both the AGU and the National Academy of Scientists claim that open communication is their policy, sharing of important scientific discoveries and transparency in research must be allowed. Failure to do so makes a travesty of science and is a great disservice to the public who rely on scientists to tell them the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth!
(1a) Schweitzer, M.H., J. L. Wittmeyer, J.R. Horner, and J. K. Toporski. 2005. Soft-tissue and cellular preservation in Tyrannosaurus Rex. Science 307: 1952-1955.
(1b) Schweitzer, M. H. Blood from Stone. Scientific American, December 2010. (Mounting evidence from dinosaur bones shows that contrary to common belief, organic material can sometimes survive in fossils for millions of years.)
(3) Berger, R. and W.F. Libby. 1968. La Brea Tar Pit series. Radiocarbon 10(2): 402-403.
(4) Berger, R., A.G. Horney, and W.F. Libby. 1964. Radiocarbon dating of bone and shell from their organic components, Science, Vol. 144, 22 May, 1964: pp. 999-1001.
(5) Holzschuh, J., J. Pontcharra, H. Miller. 2009. Datazioni recenti al C-14 di fossili includenti collagene proveniente da ossa di. pp. 125-155). Evoluzionismo: Il tramonto di una ipotesi (Evolutionism: The demise of an hypothesis). Editor, Roberto de Mattei, Edizioni, Cantagalli s.r.l. Siena, nellottobre 2009 [Available in English: RECENT C-14 DATING OF FOSSILS INCLUDING DINOSAUR BONE COLLAGEN. Are the results a confirmation of rapid formation of the geologic column as modern sedimentology studies have predicted?
(6) Harrington, C.R. and R. Morlan. 2002. Evidence for human modification of a late pleistocene bison (bison sp.) Bone from the Klondike District, Yukon Territory, Canada. Arctic, Vol. 55 No 2 (June 2002) pp. 143-147. http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic55-2-143.pdf
(7) Vasilchuk et al. 1997. Radiocarbon ages of mammoths in Northern Eurasia: Implications for population development and late quaternary environment, Radiocarbon 39(1) pp. 1-18.
(8) Arslanov, Kh. A. and Yu. S. Svezhentsev 1993. An improved method for radiocarbon dating fossil bones. Radiocarbon, Vol. 35, No. 3 P. 387-391.
(9) Taylor, R.E., J. Southon. 2007. Use of natural diamonds to monitor C-14 AMS instrument backgrounds. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259 282-287.
(10) Berthault, G. 2002. Geological dating principles questioned. Paleohydraulics: a new approach. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics 22 (3): 19-26 China.
(11a) Berthault, G. 2004. Sedimentological interpretation of the Tonto Group stratigraphy (Grand Canyon, Colorado River) Journal of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Lithology and Mineral Resources, vol. 39. No. 5,
(11b) G. Berthault, A. V. Lalomov, and M. A Tugarova. Reconstruction of Paleolithodynamic Formation Conditions of Cambrian Ordovician Sandstones in the Northwestern Russian Platform. Lithology and Mineral Resources, 2011, Vol. 46, No. 1 pages 60-70.
(12-a) Juergen Schieber and John B. Southard. Bedload transport of mud by floccule ripplesDire ct observation of ripple migration processes and their implications, Geology, June 2009, v. 37, no. 6, p. 483-486, doi:10.1130/G25319A.1. (12-b) Juergen Schieber, John B. Southard, Kevin Thaisen. Accretion of Mudstone Beds from Migrating floccule ripples", Science, 14 Dec. 2007, v. 318, no. 5857 p. 1760-1763. (3-c) Science News June 6, 2009. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/318/5857/17...
(13) Fineberg, J. 1997. From Cinderellas dilemma to rock slides. Nature 386:323-324.
(14) Julien, Pierre Y., Yongqiang Lan, Guy Berthault. 1993. Experiments on stratification of heterogeneous sand mixtures, Bulletin Societe Geologie, France. 164(5):649-660.
(15) Makes, H.A., S. Havlin, P.R. King, H.E. Stanley. 1997. Spontaneous stratification in granular mixtures. Nature. 386:379-382.
(16) Dalrymple, G.B. 1969. Ar/Ar analysis of historic lava flows. Earth and Planetary ??
(17) Dalrymple, G. B. 1990. Radiometric dating does work.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol20/4180_radiometeric_dating_does_work_12 _30_1899.asp ??
(18) Giem, P. Carbon Content of Fossil Carbon. Origins 51:6-30 (2001)
(19) Neilsen-Marsh, C. 2002. Biomolecules in Fossil Remains Multidisciplinary Approach to Endurance. The Biochemist, June 2002 http://www.biochemist.org/bio/02403/0012/024030012.pd
Reference # 18 discussed below is a very important reference as it lists all the carbon containing fossil rock materials that have been used to calibrate AMS units. As the author Paul Giem points out there should be NO C-14 content if the rocks were truly millions of years old as the AMS counts all the atoms associated with carbon.
http://educatetruth.com/science/?p=14 Paul Giem shows that all ancient fossils from marble to anthracite coal to whale bone contain some C14 as discovered by AMS laboratories. One Table contains 67 such data in percent of modern C-14 (pmc) in carbon from Pliocene to Cambrian strata. Testing for C-14 content of dinosaur bones, diamonds and carbon-containing-meteorites is fully justified.
Radiocarbon Journal numerous articles
Young age of dinosaur with Carbon dating such as Mosasaur article by ICR's Brian Thomas
Measurable 14C in fossilized organic materials:
Fifth International Conference on Creationism August 4-8, 2003. Refer to website found at