Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 745 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 156,132
Pageviews Today: 262,870Threads Today: 33Posts Today: 760
05:33 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised

 
Kakarot

User ID: 76686849
Australia
06/20/2018 10:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
carbon dating is only used for dating organic matter. it is only used for things younger than 50,000-70,000 years old. They do not use carbon dating on anything older than that because they know it does not work on things older than that.
 Quoting: Kakarot


So how do you know its under 50k years in the first place?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 45317719


[link to science.howstuffworks.com (secure)]
Kakarot
Layers of Reality  (OP)

User ID: 75758325
United States
06/20/2018 10:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
You thought they only used carbon dating for everything otherwise you wouldn't have added "And here we see some disbelief that carbon dating could be accurate when measuring dates OVER 30,000 years as a result of the ratio of atmospheric radioactive carbon to nonradioactive carbon has not remaining consistent over time."
 Quoting: Kakarot


I said thats the only thing they use? Can you respond to this comment with my quoted message that says exactly what you said I said?

You are literally adding 1 and 1 together and making 15 out of it lol. You're leaping to conclusions and using assumptions rather than unbiasedly looking at the information supplied and responding only to that. This just isnt' that big of a deal for you to be so concerned about, but if you want to show concern, try to be concerned about the information given....instead of being concerned about your personal assumptions about that data.
Layers of Reality  (OP)

User ID: 75758325
United States
06/20/2018 10:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Carbon dating may be inaccurate, but that does not validate any of the following.
Nibiru.
The bible and religious history.
Atlantis.
Flat earth bs.
Nothing will change that crap to be true. So before ya open up any can o worms, dont. Invalidating carbon dating does not make your false crap true.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57942285


Interestingly you were the only person to 'open that can of worms'



So weird when people tell you not to do something that they, themselves are doing.

I think they call that 'projection.'
Layers of Reality  (OP)

User ID: 75758325
United States
06/20/2018 10:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
I make a post that says we can't trust carbon dating over a certain amount of time

and get pulled around by guys upset that I advertised carbon dating can't be trusted over a certain amount of time.

Duh, other atoms/radioisotopes exist and can be used for dating, but this thread was about what scientists are recently saying about carbon dating.


Most people don't know of other isotopes used for dating, so posting something like this has more value than those upset that I shared this today allow themselves to see.

Last Edited by Layers of Reality on 06/20/2018 10:55 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 57942285
Canada
06/20/2018 11:10 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
That's because the topic of carbon dating invalidation always comes before the presentation of a wild speculation that does not fit our timescale as we accept it. So what are you going to present?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 70411380
United States
06/20/2018 11:16 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Carbon dating may be inaccurate, but that does not validate any of the following.
Nibiru.
The bible and religious history.
Atlantis.
Flat earth bs.
Nothing will change that crap to be true. So before ya open up any can o worms, dont. Invalidating carbon dating does not make your false crap true.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57942285


I’m curious as to what the connection is between carbon dating and the Bible?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 57942285
Canada
06/20/2018 11:19 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Really, a book that many believe dates time as vastly different, things like the universe being in the thousands of years old rather than billions... minor stuff like that
Regal Beast

User ID: 75610162
United States
06/20/2018 11:22 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Man, thought people more science educated on here.

The whole dating thing is dependent on the half-life of the element being measured. Elements decay at a known rate.

Uranium eventually decays into lead for example.

Carbon-14 decays into Carbon-12. The half-life is 5,700 years.

Animals absorb carbon-14 when alive and STOP absorbing it when they die.

If you measure the amount of carbon-14 in a fossil versus carbon-12 you can calculate how much has decayed and therefore when the thing died roughly.

The same goes with the minerals in volcanic ash which are newly created when they are ejected. That means the decay clock starts right then.

If you can date an ash bed above and below a dinosaur bone bed you can therefore roughly estimate when the dinosaur was lived and died.

Last Edited by RegalBeast on 06/20/2018 11:30 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 70411380
United States
06/20/2018 11:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Really, a book that many believe dates time as vastly different, things like the universe being in the thousands of years old rather than billions... minor stuff like that
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57942285


That’s interesting because just because some people believe that it says that doesn’t mean it actually does say that, when in fact it doesn’t . . . minor stuff like that.
Layers of Reality  (OP)

User ID: 75758325
United States
06/20/2018 11:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
That's because the topic of carbon dating invalidation always comes before the presentation of a wild speculation that does not fit our timescale as we accept it. So what are you going to present?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57942285


I don't need to make wild speculations. This thread was meant to talk about facts.

Really, a book that many believe dates time as vastly different, things like the universe being in the thousands of years old rather than billions... minor stuff like that
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57942285



Nobody here is talking about young earth theory. I'm sure there are threads on it if you're interested though.

Last Edited by Layers of Reality on 06/20/2018 11:31 AM
Desertwolf

User ID: 75934309
United States
06/20/2018 11:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
It has been well known carbon dating is not the most accurate for decades. They do not use this method to determine the age of the earth. As far as archaeology, how do you think they figured our carbon dating is flawed. There are many methods to date things. The older we go the larger the range of dates possible. When you are dealing with a timescale of 6.4 GA what is an error of +-50 years? We know with certainty that humans have been around 200K years. So what if we get the date of the shroud of turin wrong.
And here we are staring at each other through an electronic............ error goto ram

I FIGHT FOR ROME!!!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74772864
Canada
06/20/2018 11:33 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Well that's a shame. Without the wild speculation, this thread isn't even news, it's not even that it's old news, it's never been news. It's an understood thing.
So without it leading up to something, it's a nothing burger. Sorry.
jkm1864

User ID: 75142276
United States
06/20/2018 11:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
The main mistake that scientists make when using carbon dating is they assume the level of sun light that the earth receives is uniform throughout history.
Pussy Grabber Extraordinaire
Regal Beast

User ID: 75610162
United States
06/20/2018 11:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
It has been well known carbon dating is not the most accurate for decades. They do not use this method to determine the age of the earth. As far as archaeology, how do you think they figured our carbon dating is flawed. There are many methods to date things. The older we go the larger the range of dates possible. When you are dealing with a timescale of 6.4 GA what is an error of +-50 years? We know with certainty that humans have been around 200K years. So what if we get the date of the shroud of turin wrong.
 Quoting: Desertwolf


Exactly.

It's the relative ages that are actually more important to understand our ancient history.

The last dinosaur is always going to be like 40X older than the first hominid no matter what ruler you use.

You can't make those timelines cross you would have to thrown out ALL dating methods and just say everything lived at the same time.

But then you would have to explain where are the non-fossilized dinosaur bones at human campsites and evidence of human predation on dinosaurs. Creationists never consider the evidence THEIR theory would have to produce do they.

Last Edited by RegalBeast on 06/20/2018 11:43 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 57942285
Canada
06/20/2018 11:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Way more than 40x, 65 million years is a long gap to fill for our puny young species. Good thing evolution exists to show us the trail. Exact, we are not, but we do have a ballpark, and it remains unchanged for quite some time. Nothing earthshattering has been learned that says different.
Kakarot

User ID: 76686849
Australia
06/20/2018 11:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
You thought they only used carbon dating for everything otherwise you wouldn't have added "And here we see some disbelief that carbon dating could be accurate when measuring dates OVER 30,000 years as a result of the ratio of atmospheric radioactive carbon to nonradioactive carbon has not remaining consistent over time."
 Quoting: Kakarot


I said thats the only thing they use? Can you respond to this comment with my quoted message that says exactly what you said I said?

You are literally adding 1 and 1 together and making 15 out of it lol. You're leaping to conclusions and using assumptions rather than unbiasedly looking at the information supplied and responding only to that. This just isnt' that big of a deal for you to be so concerned about, but if you want to show concern, try to be concerned about the information given....instead of being concerned about your personal assumptions about that data.
 Quoting: Layers of Reality



You are talking about carbon dating. They only use it for things under 50-70 thousand years old. Why would you say "but threatens our understanding of the timescale of Human evolution through the discovery of tools, ancient campsites & the like." when todays humans have been here for a lot longer than 50,000 years. Approximately 200,000 years. It sounded like you thought there is only carbon dating. And then the link you posted had nothing to do with carbon dating.
Kakarot
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76694968
United States
06/20/2018 11:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Why did the scientific community decided to publish a story about how their very own gold standard is flawed by design? The assumptions/design flaws in the carbon dating formula have been known for decades, but it hasn't stopped archeology from taking carbon data and proclaiming its exactitude.

I found an article from 1990 stating they found carbon dating was inaccurate, here
[link to www.nytimes.com (secure)]






And here we see some disbelief that carbon dating could be accurate when measuring dates OVER 30,000 years as a result of the ratio of atmospheric radioactive carbon to nonradioactive carbon has not remaining consistent over time.

[link to www.scmp.com]


Carbon Dating gets a reset
[link to www.scientificamerican.com (secure)]


Not only does this put a huge kink in our understanding of climate history, but threatens our understanding of the timescale of Human evolution through the discovery of tools, ancient campsites & the like.
 Quoting: Layers of Reality


Not to mention Dinosaurs, also known as Dragons.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1163218
United States
06/20/2018 11:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Lies, lies, and more lies on top of lies.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 68325540
Canada
06/20/2018 11:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Why did the scientific community decided to publish a story about how their very own gold standard is flawed by design? The assumptions/design flaws in the carbon dating formula have been known for decades, but it hasn't stopped archeology from taking carbon data and proclaiming its exactitude.

I found an article from 1990 stating they found carbon dating was inaccurate, here
[link to www.nytimes.com (secure)]






And here we see some disbelief that carbon dating could be accurate when measuring dates OVER 30,000 years as a result of the ratio of atmospheric radioactive carbon to nonradioactive carbon has not remaining consistent over time.

[link to www.scmp.com]


Carbon Dating gets a reset
[link to www.scientificamerican.com (secure)]


Not only does this put a huge kink in our understanding of climate history, but threatens our understanding of the timescale of Human evolution through the discovery of tools, ancient campsites & the like.
 Quoting: Layers of Reality


The LIE must always unravel.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 68325540
Canada
06/20/2018 11:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Way more than 40x, 65 million years is a long gap to fill for our puny young species. Good thing evolution exists to show us the trail. Exact, we are not, but we do have a ballpark, and it remains unchanged for quite some time. Nothing earthshattering has been learned that says different.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57942285


You are clueless
MaybeTrollingU

User ID: 75358302
Brazil
06/20/2018 11:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Carbon dating is ONE method of dating fossils, and yes, its not accurate for longer periods. But there are many other methods:
Radiocarbon dating - for dating organic materials (Maximum 50,000 to 60,000 years old)
Dendrochronology - for dating trees, and objects made from wood, but also very important for calibrating radiocarbon dates
Thermoluminescence dating - for dating inorganic material including ceramics
Optically or optical dating for archaeological applications
Potassium–argon dating - for dating fossilized hominid remains
Argon–argon dating - for dating fossilized hominid remains
Archaeomagnetic dating - Clay lined fire hearths take on a magnetic moment pointing to the North Pole each time they are fired and then cool. The position of the North Pole for the last time the fire hearth was used can be determined and compared to charts of known locations and dates.
Lead Corrosion Dating.[2]
Amino acid dating[3][4][5][6]
Obsidian hydration dating - a geochemical method of determining age in either absolute or relative terms of an artifact made of obsidian
Rehydroxylation dating - for dating ceramic materials[7]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 57942285
Canada
06/20/2018 11:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Really, when did the dinosaurs die out? Did that change? Modern humans are more or less a couple hundred thousand at most. So, what changed?
Regal Beast

User ID: 75610162
United States
06/20/2018 12:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Really, when did the dinosaurs die out? Did that change? Modern humans are more or less a couple hundred thousand at most. So, what changed?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 57942285


Nothing.

Non-science tards are fantasizing that all dating methods are now invalidated.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76694968
United States
06/20/2018 12:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
The questions that should be asked are - Who funded (owns) the science? (The folks that own pretty much everything else)

and

Why would they mis-represent this particular field of study? (To keep us from learning the truth).

They know their goose is cooked when the truth is known.
wisconsin

User ID: 31395171
United States
06/20/2018 12:37 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
.
... hehehehehehe ... that INACCURACY was known for sooooome time already ... maybe the article had to come out because some big INACCURACY is going to come out? ...
.
.

Our family celebrates The Lord's Feasts:
[link to www.grafted-promise.net]

Fools and the dead don't change their minds. Fools won't and the dead can't.

When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar. You are only telling the world that you fear what he might say. Quoting: CountryWise

Amos 5:13 - Therefore at such a time the prudent person keeps silent, for it is an evil time.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 73886666
Ireland
06/20/2018 12:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
carbon dating is only used for dating organic matter. it is only used for things younger than 50,000-70,000 years old. They do not use carbon dating on anything older than that because they know it does not work on things older than that.
 Quoting: Kakarot


But wait...

How do they know if something is younger than 50,000-70,000 years if they haven't carbon dated it..?
Layers of Reality  (OP)

User ID: 75758325
United States
06/20/2018 12:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
this ended up being a pretty informative thread
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 4884457
United States
06/20/2018 12:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Even though the half life of C14 is technically 5700 years, the dating calibration starts getting pretty unstable at about 4500 to 5000 years back. They can reasonably carbon date the Thera eruption to 1650 BC, but this is really about the oldest event that has been successfully dated by C14.

Stating that C14 is useful for dates beyond 6000 years old is beyond absurd. There is no such thing. It is a total hoax and myth. C14 dating starts getting really iffy about 5000 years back.
darkwolf007

User ID: 69195067
United States
06/20/2018 01:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
Just today, they did a major study on mitochondrial DNA and found that apparently evolution is WRONG wah wah and mammals all evolved about the same time as humans. So they are not seperated over time but SPONTANEOUSLY arose.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 72341210


like in the precamrbian explosion?
 Quoting: Layers of Reality


I'm on The X-Files Season 6 last episode on my main computer. It's opening sequence has Agent Scully talking about the six Great Extinctions, but no talk about what led up to each one, and how life began anew sometime after each Great Extinction. It's like all of these science shows talk about these same things over and over, but should anyone like any of us including myself should bring up these important questions of why and how we're instantly branded stupid, idiots, and/or worse therefore nullifying any credibility we have while the so-called scientists can desperately retain their rapidly deteriorating credibility.

Who or what caused each Great Extinction? Why is it that it seems as though each Great Extinction have the tale-tell signs of being someone's "Great Experiment" then once whoever it is decides their Great Experiment has reached it's conclusion or whatever they exterminate seemingly literally all life on Earth only to later repopulate the Earth with vast amounts of life for yet another Great Experiment?

The Scientific Community became an everlasting horrid joke since Einstein was declared the greatest of great scientists and all scientists since then have always paled in comparison. There have been a great many great scientists since then. Only they've been silenced through censure and up to complete discrediting through inane measures which terrifies other scientists into further compliance with whatever nonsense the Scientific Community concocts.

It truly is a great day to see a core component of the Scientific Community crumble. Too bad with all of the Corruption and other stupid crap the Scientific Community has done to all of Humanity since their "god", Einstein, will destroy everything Humanity has built thus far in the near future.

I should mention let's not forget about ClimateGate as well, guys. ClimateGate was the physical proof all of us truth seekers was looking for to disprove "Global Warming", only to find out that a major ice age is imminent and that Humanity is completely unprepared for it.
Conspiracy Theorist is nothing more than a derogatory title used to dismiss a critical thinker.

A time is coming when men will go mad,
and when they see someone who is not mad,
they will attack him, saying,
'You are mad; you are not like us."
-- St. Anthony The Great

Social Credit Loser here.
MarkinAZ

User ID: 76632876
United States
06/20/2018 01:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: CARBON DATING, the gold standard in archeological dating, IS FOUND TO BE INACCURATE. Timescale of Human Evolution/History must be revised
All reputable scientists and archeologists have known that carbon dating methods were wildly inaccurate and have been for decades! It's high time we stop using this outdated, inaccurate and largely mythological method to test or date anything!

Who knows? We might actually get accurate info for a change, not the bullshit theories that have been passed off as being true since the 1940's!





GLP