The truth: Carbon Dating. Atheist will not like this.

Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by Coup d'état, Jan 3, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Those who have ears, let him hear.


    This is how Carbon Dating is supposed to work: Carbon dating was not invented until 1949, in the last 60 years. So, when they started telling the kids the earth was billions of years old back in 1830, they did not tell them that because of Carbon dating. They never thought of Carbon dating, its never been herd of. Why were they teaching the earth was billions of years old 180 years ago ? Only because they needed billions of years to make there theory look good. That's why. If I told you a frog could turn into a prince if you kissed it, you'd say that's just a fairy tale. But if I told you a frog could turn into a prince if you wait billions of years, ahhh maybe so...ahh. Now it becomes believable to kids. No. It's still a fairy tale. What a stupid Idea.

    The geological column is where it all started. The earth was divided up into layers. Each layer was assigned a name and an index fossil. Then they, to prove these layers are old, picked numbers out of the clear blue sky and any dating method that comes along now HAS TO MATCH the geological column, or it is rejected. (the column is the evolution bible).

    Only because the column has been taught for 180 years now. So surely it's true ? No. Just because it has been taught for 180 years does not make it true, but this is the logic scientist have. We know that the geological column is established so all dates have to match this or we toss them all out. And the testing will continue until it does match. They might have to test a sample 5 or 6 times until the get the number they want. How do they know any of them are right then ? If you're getting a different number every time.

    O'rourke, J.E - Pragmatism Materialism in Stratigraphy- American Journal of Science Vol. 276

    Ageriderk V. - Fossils Frustrations - New Scientist Vol 100

    They don't date the fossils by Carbon dating, they date them by their geological column position.

    Here is what happens: The earths atmosphere is about 100 miles thick. A space shuttle to get outside its friction has to get up about 100 miles out of the air. If you look at the atmosphere, it has different layers. It has a heat sink, where it gets very cold up about 7-8 miles up, like 80-100 below zero. The earths atmosphere contains mostly nitrogen (78%), 21% oxygen and a little Co2 for the plants to breath. And there is a tiny bit of Radio Active Carbon (C14), about .0000765%.

    This radio active Carbon C14 is different then regular Carbon. Its produced by radiation striking the atmosphere. Sun light strikes the atmosphere, slaps the nitrogen around and turns it into Carbon 14. It all starts by the sun light in the atmosphere. About 21 pounds of Carbon 14 is produced every year. And that is spread out all over the world. If I told you there is 21 pounds of gold, but spread out all over the globe, would you even look for it ? You won't find it. Real tiny amounts.

    If you look at the periodic table, Carbon and Nitrogen are right next to each other. Nitrogen has an atomic weight of 14.01 and Carbon has a weight of 12.02. But if the sun light slaps the nitrogen around it will knock a few things off of it and it becomes Carbon 14. So, it still weighs as much as the Nitrogen but now it's considered a Carbon. It's called radio active, which means it does not listen to the radio (lol), It's just unstable and it's going to break apart.

    Like 3 guys dating the same girl, that relationship is not going to last forever, something will go wrong. Carbon 14 is unstable and it does not like being Carbon 14, it wants to get out the situation. So it breaks down about half of it will break down on a statistical average, half of it will fall apart every 5,730 years. It is doing this on a purely random procedure, you got a pile of molecules and you will never know which one is going to fall apart.

    Statistics tell us about half will fall apart every 5,700 years, roughly., while it is Carbon 14 it is floating around in the atmosphere; like the rest of the Carbon...and it latches on to oxygen as Carbon often does and becomes Carbon dioxide. They hook up and happily float around in the atmosphere. The plants are breathing in Co2. Animals come along and eat the plants. So, the only way Carbon 14 gets into the living world is from being produced by the sun striking the atmosphere, plants then breath it in and animals eat the plants.

    Probably in your life time you have eaten plants or animals that have eaten plants. Every thing we eat is from one of those two sources The plants are absorbing Co2 some of it is radio active, so if the atmosphere contains 000765% it is assumed the plants also have .0000765%. Probably a reasonable assumption and nobody argues with them. It needs to be pointed out though, that this is one of DOZENS of assumptions that can enter in and really mess up things like Carbon Dating. So, probably you have .000765% Carbon in you, because you've been eating these plants or animals that has been eating plants. Probably it's all balanced in nature.

    When the plant or animal dies it stops taking in more Carbon 14. When it stops breathing. Now, what ever it had is going to decay. It was decaying while it was alive, but now there is nothing to replace it. So what they do is they compare the amount of C14 in the fossils with the amount in the atmosphere. They say wow that fossil only got half as much, therefore it's been dead for one half-life (5,700). Because it continues to decay after it died, but now it cannot be replaced. So while it was alive, it had about .000765%, if it only gots .0003825% it has been dead for one half life, or two half lives, or 3 half lives etc...

    In theory it never goes to zero, but for practical purposes, you can't measure beyond a certain amount, you'd run out of stuff to measure. It goes from a half to a 1/4 to a 1/8 to a 1/16 to not enough to measure.

    www. icr.org Think about what this means.
    test
  2. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    The text books will tell you coal formed 250 million years ago, in the Carboniferous era. And when they test coal it still has carbon 14. How is that possible ? Think about what this means. If all the carbon 14 atoms would have disappeared in say 30,000-50,000, why would there still be carbon 14 atoms in coal ?

    I got an idea, it is not 1/4 million years old. Oh, they don't like that answer. They;ll keep searching until they find there answer because they don't want that one, for sure. And diamonds, which they say formed millions and millions of years ago, still have carbon 14 in them. It is not possible to contaminate one of those. Diamonds are the hardest substance we have. So, how do you get carbon 14 in diamonds ? And when did diamonds form really, honestly now. Think about this.

    **

    The Carbon Dating assumptions have to be pointed out. They'll say we know carbon decay is at a certain rate and so we know it only gots half as much, it's half as old. There are assumptions that mess up everything.

    If I said we are going to fill a barrel with water, and I put a hose on the top of the barrel and start to flood it. I then put two holes in the barrel at the bottom. While you are putting it in, water is leaking out. The earth's atmosphere is kind of like this barrel. It is always getting brand new carbon 14, 21 pounds a year being put in. And it is always leaking out by decay. So, the question is how long would it take before it reached a equilibrium ? With a barrel you can actually use math and calculate the amount of water per minute going in and calculate a certain amount leaking out...and you can find when it will reach equilibrium, and where. This can all be calculated. And with the atmosphere, the question is when will it reach equilibrium ? So, the guys who invented carbon dating in the late 1940s said I wonder about the earth's atmosphere reaching equilibrium. They did a bunch of studies on this question. Who knows how they got to this though.

    If we take a new planet earth, created it from scratch, and got it spinning around the sun, how long would it take to reach this equilibrium point in the atmosphere, where the production rate and destruction rate is the same ? They determined it would take about 30,000-50,000 years to reach equilibrium. Not sure on how they did all this. Then they made two mistakes.

    1. they said, we know the earth is millions of years old (it is not)
    2. then they ignored the equilibrium problem because we would have past that 30,000-50,000 years ago. The earth has not reached equilibrium yet.


    They have discovered the earth has yet to reach equilibrium today, Radio Carbon is still forming, 30-40% faster then it is decaying. Now, think about this. If radio Carbon is still forming faster then it's decaying, that means the earth is less than 30,000 years old, number one. Number two you can't carbon date anything. because you would have to know when it lived so you could calculate when it lived (lol). You would already have to know when it lived to know how much Carbon 14 it was breathing at that time. It does not work (the #1 assumption is the amount of c14 in the atmosphere has always been the same; has reached equilibrium).

    If an animal is still alive it should give you about 16 clicks on your Geiger Counter, per minute, per gram. If you are only getting 8, you're been through one half life, 4 clicks 2 half lives etc... This is called the calibration curve. In theory it sounds like it should work. But there are several real obvious assumptions, how do they not see this is beyond common sense.

    Suppose you walk into a room and saw a burning candle on a table and I want you to tell me when was it lit. You find out it's 7 inches tall. That won't tell you anything....so now we gotta measure how fast it's burning. So, we measure the candle awhile and get a stop watch and get it down to the billionth of a second. SO, we find that the candle has been burning an inch an hour.

    Here are the two facts: it's burning on inch an hour and it is 7 inches tall. When was it lit ? Nobody can figure it out. Unless you make some assumptions.

    Assumption #1: How tall was the candle assumption will be made. Assumption #2 Has it always burned at the same rate assumption must be made...but really, neither of these can be known.

    If you find a fossil in the dirt, the amount of carbon can be measured, the amount of decay can be determined. Nobody argues with this. How much was in it when it lived, has it all ways decayed at the same rate ? They can't know. Has it been contaminated stetting in the ground all these 'millions' of years. There is no way to know these things. If the earth had a canopy of water about the atmosphere, or a canopy of ice, that would of blocked a lot of radiation from the sun which would have prevented most of the carbon 14 from even forming. SO animals that lived before the flood wold of lived in a world with much less carbon 14 to begin with. Maybe none, but certainly less.

    Summery:

    assumptions of Carbon Dating:

    1. Atmospheric C-14 is in equilibrium
    2. Decay rate remains constant
    3. Initial amounts of C-14 can be known
    4. The sample being tested has not been contaminated for thousands of years.

    5. The geologic column can be used as a base to calibrate the C-14 dates



    A few examples of wild dates by radiometric dating:

    -Shells from living snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old.

    -Living mollusk shells were dated up to 2,300 years old.

    -A freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1,300 years ago.

    -One part of the Vollosovitch mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years and another part at 44,000. Talk about a slow birth lol

    -Structure, metamorphism, sedimentary reworking, and other complications have to be considered. Radiometric dating would not have been feasible if the geologic column had not been erected first

    -Material from layers where dinosaurs are found carbon dated at 34,000 years old
    test
  3. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Not one atheist can touch this...it destroys their religious world view, thus silence. Typical in the Establishment. This silence is why many are deceived and indoctrinated to think grandpa is a rock. Fools.

    Truth: anything that destroys evolution philosophy is hushed to maintain the lie. The world must be looked at through a naturalist view, that is that the world created itself form nothing.

    But science tells us there must be a creator. I suggest you all start to study.

    I did. So can you.
    test
  4. NightmareEx

    NightmareEx The Beast

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    5,134
    lol I suggest you take the hint. None is interested in your junk science any longer. We're just ignoring your dumb, longwinded posts, which are about as scientific as Mario and Luigi eating mushrooms to get bigger.

    Epicfail.
    test
  5. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Mario and Luigi hahaha

    You don't understand Carbon Dating. I just showed you why it does not work and that it is in fact evidence for a young earth.

    Your response shows two things:

    1. your pride (pride is separating you from knowing the truth).
    2. your faith in your religion.


    If I'm wrong, please correct me scientifically. You can't.


    -Your friend.
    test
  6. lyricalpriest

    lyricalpriest Rap Games Dawson Creek

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2000
    Messages:
    24,093
    test
  7. Jay Bee

    Jay Bee Boricua

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,596
    the silence comes from the extra long post. *ADVICE ON GETTING MORE FEEDBACK* try attacking one thing at a time instead of everything in one post.
    test
  8. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    NO, the posts were on carbon dating alone. There is not one way to refute it.

    It's game over. I tell you the truth. Evolution is a philosophy to be upheld at all cost, and it is not science inference.

    Can't you see ? Science, honest real science, 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt points to our Creator.

    Why ?

    Because man was created. Don't believe me ? Study. Don't be a fool deceived to work for Satan. Nobody will openly and knowingly do that, but that is why deception makes you believe what is false to be true, and what is true to be false.

    Open your mind.
    test
  9. Jay Bee

    Jay Bee Boricua

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,596
    blah blah blah blah. i know it was on carbon dating. what im saying is that atheist are very willing to debate you on this exact subject. but if you are gonna make the post sooooo damn long that it needs multiple post to fit, then nobody will read it. Try making one post to start. then after a few post then throw a few more points in at a time.

    i can see your dying to debate evolution here, and nobody has taken on your offer while they all debate with other posters. like me or not take the advice or continue to be ignored
    test
  10. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Yes, they are not willing to debate. Not one atheist here will debate me or offer any defense to their philosophy religion. Not one. They have no evidence scientifically to argue with, that is why. I have no seen one present anything substantial that has not been for years already defeated.


    I am on the warpath serving the TRUTH, King Jesus.

    Besides, I know the majority have read the OP anyhow. They have nothing but a thick indoctrination stupor around their beliefs. Since birth and its reinforced in ALL mainstream heathen outlets. It is a spell. It is completely unfounded scientifically. It's the fabric. The world is sin and ruled by Satan. No one form of logic, reason, science, revisionist history, evidence can refute the TRUTH.

    I pray to God you wake up Jay Bee. I sense an understanding in you. Don't be a fool.
    test
  11. Jay Bee

    Jay Bee Boricua

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,596
    what.... dont.... you ....understand ...about ....your.... post ....being ....too ....long?
    test
  12. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    It's not long. It's for you maybe, because it is not filled with filth or fiction ?
    test
  13. Jay Bee

    Jay Bee Boricua

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,596
    imagine if they gave a candidate in the presidential election an unlimitied amount of time, dont u think it would be boring and a seasaw debate?

    imagine the show "meet the press" and how they go back and front, making one point at a time. very few of us as adults have time for not only reading your long responses but fully answering them. if you strech it out u will get what you want and everybody will be less annoyed. do u even understand im attempting to give you the answers you so much seek???
    test
  14. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    I understand, thanks.

    What this thread did was just SHATTER Carbon Dating and provide smoking gun REAL evidence for a young earth that is SOLID.


    Carbon Dating has been used to show an old earth for 60 years to the kids in universities the world over. It has helped destroy the truth. And you think it is too long ?

    Do you realize what the OP implicates ? Are you that far gone ? Are you that desensitized to truth ?

    You don't need to answer.
    test
  15. Jay Bee

    Jay Bee Boricua

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,596
    maybe it did destroy carbon dating. the sad part is no one even read it so we will never kno.

    re-create the thread, ill comment. try not to be an asshole and stick to the science and not god, and you will engage in a great debate.
    test
  16. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Thanks, but God is Worthy.

    Jay Bee, just read the tread. Maybe not now, but maybe later perhaps. It will be here.


    Can I ask you what you want to know about the true world view ? What questions do you have ? I need ideas to make a new thread. What have you always wanted to know ?
    test
  17. MissAndrya

    MissAndrya Evolution is what is.

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2011
    Messages:
    5,052
    True story.

    The minute I see the posts are longer than a paragraph or two, I ignore them.
    test
  18. NightmareEx

    NightmareEx The Beast

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    5,134
    Nah nah we're just not reading them because they're airtight proof that can't be refuted!!

    Now we've told you what's up your arrogant bitch, so you can modify your bullshit accordingly, or continue to get ignore and uh "claim wins for Jesus" or whatever. It matters not at this point.
    test
  19. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Continue in your slumber then. What I post is truth and any open mind should see that.

    This tells me a lot, though I suspected both MA and Nightx are blind and willingly ignorant.


    In the Greek that is dumb on purpose.
    test
  20. NightmareEx

    NightmareEx The Beast

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    5,134
    No. You. Don't.

    It's my lack of ignorance that has lead me away from your stupid religion. If your head wasn't literally up your ass, you would see that.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)