Older then we think

[the annoying thing]

Seem good prints found in New Mexico will rewrite some history.
They estimate they are 23000 years old ,a whopping 10,000 year older then when science said man kind had been in America .

Who knows the actual time me when they arrived.It could of been much earlier .

 

[Gabriel_Bell]

Most human remains rot or decay, so finding really old ones is difficult.
It is likely that people who were in the Americas before the "discovery" came over several thousands of years, on a seasonal basis, because you can walk on ice, but not on water.

 

[mark francis]

Most human remains rot or decay, so finding really old ones is difficult.
It is likely that people who were in the Americas before the "discovery" came over several thousands of years, on a seasonal basis, because you can walk on ice, but not on water.

Here come the cleaners, mopping up facts and rewriting narratives to hide the fact that evolution is a lie and has always been wrong about almost everything.

When I was a youth in Texas my school class (public school) visited the Paluxy River site where human and dinosaur footprints were preserved in solid rock side by side.

 

[Gabriel_Bell]

Here come the cleaners, mopping up facts and rewriting narratives to hide the fact that evolution is a lie and has always been wrong about almost everything.

When I was a youth in Texas my school class (public school) visited the Paluxy River site where human and dinosaur footprints were preserved in solid rock side by side.

Humans and dinosaurs did not exist at the same time. It seems as thought some people suck at analyzing footprints.

 

[mark francis]

Humans and dinosaurs did not exist at the same time. It seems as thought some people suck at analyzing footprints.

That's what secularists thought until Mary Schweitzer shocked the research boots off them by discovering soft tissues in dinosaur bones, a phenomena secularitst had claimed for years was not possible given secular estimates of how long ago dinosaurs died off.

 

[pjmret]

That's what secularists thought until Mary Schweitzer shocked the research boots off them by discovering soft tissues in dinosaur bones, a phenomena secularitst had claimed for years was not possible given secular estimates of how long ago dinosaurs died off.

and upon analysis, soft tissue preservation over long periods of time was scientifically explained.
that's the beauty of science, new discoveries are analyzed and explained. people become more educated.
unlike mindless religious faith which traps people blind acceptance of dogma

here is the link to a paper by mary herself for example, describing how it happens.

A role for iron and oxygen chemistry in preserving soft tissues, cells and molecules from deep time

The persistence of original soft tissues in Mesozoic fossil bone is not explained by current chemical degradation models. We identified iron particles (goethite-αFeO(OH)) associated with soft tissues recovered from two Mesozoic dinosaurs, using ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

so no, humans and dinosaurs didn't exist together, science *****. lol

 

[mark francis]

and upon analysis, soft tissue preservation over long periods of time was scientifically explained.

Of course. After months of initial total rejection of Schweitzer's discovery the secularists changed their longetivity of dinosaur soft tissue assumptions by scrapping the former assumptions and making new assumptions that conform to erroneous evlutionist speculations instead of accepting the anti-evolution scientific truth.

Nevertheless, a few sharp scientists fooled reputable labs into testing dinosaur bones for age and the labs guaranteed their results were accurate and uncontaminated, not knowing the bones they had tested were dinosaur bones. The tested ages of the bones ranged from around 30,000 years to around 50,000 years. Facts don't lie.

 

[pjmret]

Of course. After months of initial total rejection of Schweitzer's discovery the secularists changed their longetivity of dinosaur soft tissue assumptions by scrapping the former assumptions and making new assumptions that conform to erroneous evlutionist speculations instead of accepting the anti-evolution scientific truth.

Nevertheless, a few sharp scientists fooled reputable labs into testing dinosaur bones for age and the labs guaranteed their results were accurate and uncontaminated, not knowing the bones they had tested were dinosaur bones. The tested ages of the bones ranged from around 30,000 years to around 50,000 years. Facts don't lie.

yes, that's how science wors, science *****. lol.
as new evidence comes along, science adjusts.
unlike mindless religious dogma. lol

feel free to post links to your claims about dinosaur bones.

 

[Gabriel_Bell]

That's what secularists thought until Mary Schweitzer shocked the research boots off them by discovering soft tissues in dinosaur bones, a phenomena secularitst had claimed for years was not possible given secular estimates of how long ago dinosaurs died off.

Explain how finding soft tissues in unrelated dinosaur bones proves that these were actually dinosaur and human footprints.
Dinosaurs and humans did exist during the same time period.

You need to find a human skeleton with a spear stabbing a dinosaur skeleton. Come back when you find one.

 

[mark francis]

yes, that's how science wors, science *****. lol.
as new evidence comes along, science adjusts.
unlike mindless religious dogma. lol

feel free to post links to your claims about dinosaur bones.

You claim science adjusts but you are wrong. Rather than accept the fact that evolutionist a priori age speculations about dinosaurs were proven wrong by soft tissues, the thick-headed evolutionists changed their scientific speculations on the shelf life of soft tissues to accommodate their erroneous old age speculations. Recent scientific research has shown that dinosaur bones are not as old as evolutionists erroneously imagined for years.

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils | TASC (tasc-creationscience.org) Nov 2013

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils

November 2013

By

Joe Spears MS

Dinosaurs

Fossils

Radioactive Decay

Radiometric Dating

Dinosaurs supposedly died out 65 million years ago.
What if they didn’t?

Hugh Miller and others authored a paper detailing the results of carbon-14 dating of dinosaur fossils which was presented at the Western Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 2012. 3 , 4 The ages for the dinosaur fossils presented in this paper were far younger than the conventionally accepted ages. Each of the two thousand meeting participants was given a disc which included the abstract of the carbon-14 dating report. However, the abstract of the Miller presentation was removed from the website for the conference. 1 , 5 Why is the information presented in the paper important? If the accepted ages of millions of years for dinosaurs were to be found to be in error, this would be a problem to evolution. The dinosaur dates reported below and discussed in the AOGS 2012 paper discussed throughout this article, included triceratops, hadrosaur, allosaurus, and acrocanthasaurs. Below is a list of some dinosaur fossils and their dated ages from the Miller paper. 6

• An allosaurus from the Morrison formation, late Jurassic, found in 1989 was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry. The age was found to be 31,360 ± 100 years old.
• The femur of an Upper Creataceous Hell Creek formation triceratops-like dinosaur (perhaps a new type of ceratopsid) found in 2007 was carbon-14 dated by the University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry and found to be 39,230 ± 140 years old.
• Another Hell Creek formation dinosaur, found in 2004, a triceratops, was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry in 2009 as 24,340 ± 70 years old.
• An apatosaurus was found in late Jurassic strata of the Morrison formation, and excavation was done in 2007 and 2009. In 2011 the University of Georgia dated the fossil to 38,250 ± 160 years old.
• A hadrosaur’s hip bone was found in 2011 in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia dated a sample from this bone to be 37,660 ± 160 years old.
• In 2012 a triceratops horn was found. The University of Georgia dated the fossil to be 33,570 ± 120 years old.
• A femur bone from a hardosaur in 2004 was found in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry dated the sample to 25,670 ± 220 years old.
• An acrocanthosaurus (carnivorous dinosaur) specimen was excavated in 1984 near Glen Rose, Texas and was tested in 2010 by the University of Georgia. It was found to be 29,690 ± 90 years old.

Are the dates beyond the range of testing technology? No, the University of Georgia had extended the maximum limit up over 50,000 years, and the ages were all well below this. Are the ages still too old? After all, even though these ages are much younger than conventional ages, many creationists believe life on earth to be much younger than even the reported carbon-14 ages of these dinosaur fossils. This question will be dealt with in a later section of this article.

Another question that might come up with respect to these studies is the issue of contamination. If young organic material became mixed with the dinosaur material that was carbon-14 dated, then the younger material would skew the result to a younger age.

Special care was taken to prevent this kind of contamination.

Bones were cleaned by ultrasonics.

• Then the bone was crushed and acetic acid was applied to remove any possible external contamination (carbonates).
• Hydrochloric acid was added to dissolve the bone and release carbon dioxide, which was then chemically treated to produce graphite. This graphite was then tested for carbon-14. 7

Another report shows that a mosasaur was dated at about 24,000 years old; 8 , 9 this result was blamed on bacterial contamination, though no bacteria were discovered. 10 , 11

 

[pjmret]

You claim science adjusts but you are wrong. Rather than accept the fact that evolutionist a priori age speculations about dinosaurs were proven wrong by soft tissues, the thick-headed evolutionists changed their scientific speculations on the shelf life of soft tissues to accommodate their erroneous old age speculations. Recent scientific research has shown that dinosaur bones are not as old as evolutionists erroneously imagined for years.

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils | TASC (tasc-creationscience.org) Nov 2013

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils

November 2013

By

Joe Spears MS

Dinosaurs

Fossils

Radioactive Decay

Radiometric Dating

Dinosaurs supposedly died out 65 million years ago.
What if they didn’t?

Hugh Miller and others authored a paper detailing the results of carbon-14 dating of dinosaur fossils which was presented at the Western Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 2012. 3 , 4 The ages for the dinosaur fossils presented in this paper were far younger than the conventionally accepted ages. Each of the two thousand meeting participants was given a disc which included the abstract of the carbon-14 dating report. However, the abstract of the Miller presentation was removed from the website for the conference. 1 , 5 Why is the information presented in the paper important? If the accepted ages of millions of years for dinosaurs were to be found to be in error, this would be a problem to evolution. The dinosaur dates reported below and discussed in the AOGS 2012 paper discussed throughout this article, included triceratops, hadrosaur, allosaurus, and acrocanthasaurs. Below is a list of some dinosaur fossils and their dated ages from the Miller paper. 6

• An allosaurus from the Morrison formation, late Jurassic, found in 1989 was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry. The age was found to be 31,360 ± 100 years old.
• The femur of an Upper Creataceous Hell Creek formation triceratops-like dinosaur (perhaps a new type of ceratopsid) found in 2007 was carbon-14 dated by the University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry and found to be 39,230 ± 140 years old.
• Another Hell Creek formation dinosaur, found in 2004, a triceratops, was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry in 2009 as 24,340 ± 70 years old.
• An apatosaurus was found in late Jurassic strata of the Morrison formation, and excavation was done in 2007 and 2009. In 2011 the University of Georgia dated the fossil to 38,250 ± 160 years old.
• A hadrosaur’s hip bone was found in 2011 in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia dated a sample from this bone to be 37,660 ± 160 years old.
• In 2012 a triceratops horn was found. The University of Georgia dated the fossil to be 33,570 ± 120 years old.
• A femur bone from a hardosaur in 2004 was found in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry dated the sample to 25,670 ± 220 years old.
• An acrocanthosaurus (carnivorous dinosaur) specimen was excavated in 1984 near Glen Rose, Texas and was tested in 2010 by the University of Georgia. It was found to be 29,690 ± 90 years old.

Are the dates beyond the range of testing technology? No, the University of Georgia had extended the maximum limit up over 50,000 years, and the ages were all well below this. Are the ages still too old? After all, even though these ages are much younger than conventional ages, many creationists believe life on earth to be much younger than even the reported carbon-14 ages of these dinosaur fossils. This question will be dealt with in a later section of this article.

Another question that might come up with respect to these studies is the issue of contamination. If young organic material became mixed with the dinosaur material that was carbon-14 dated, then the younger material would skew the result to a younger age.

Special care was taken to prevent this kind of contamination.

Bones were cleaned by ultrasonics.

• Then the bone was crushed and acetic acid was applied to remove any possible external contamination (carbonates).
• Hydrochloric acid was added to dissolve the bone and release carbon dioxide, which was then chemically treated to produce graphite. This graphite was then tested for carbon-14. 7

Another report shows that a mosasaur was dated at about 24,000 years old; 8 , 9 this result was blamed on bacterial contamination, though no bacteria were discovered. 10 , 11

Scientists always adjusting to new evidence that's exactly how science works like God you are so stupid

 

[pjmret]

You claim science adjusts but you are wrong. Rather than accept the fact that evolutionist a priori age speculations about dinosaurs were proven wrong by soft tissues, the thick-headed evolutionists changed their scientific speculations on the shelf life of soft tissues to accommodate their erroneous old age speculations. Recent scientific research has shown that dinosaur bones are not as old as evolutionists erroneously imagined for years.

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils | TASC (tasc-creationscience.org) Nov 2013

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils

November 2013

By

Joe Spears MS

Dinosaurs

Fossils

Radioactive Decay

Radiometric Dating

Dinosaurs supposedly died out 65 million years ago.
What if they didn’t?

Hugh Miller and others authored a paper detailing the results of carbon-14 dating of dinosaur fossils which was presented at the Western Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 2012. 3 , 4 The ages for the dinosaur fossils presented in this paper were far younger than the conventionally accepted ages. Each of the two thousand meeting participants was given a disc which included the abstract of the carbon-14 dating report. However, the abstract of the Miller presentation was removed from the website for the conference. 1 , 5 Why is the information presented in the paper important? If the accepted ages of millions of years for dinosaurs were to be found to be in error, this would be a problem to evolution. The dinosaur dates reported below and discussed in the AOGS 2012 paper discussed throughout this article, included triceratops, hadrosaur, allosaurus, and acrocanthasaurs. Below is a list of some dinosaur fossils and their dated ages from the Miller paper. 6

• An allosaurus from the Morrison formation, late Jurassic, found in 1989 was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry. The age was found to be 31,360 ± 100 years old.
• The femur of an Upper Creataceous Hell Creek formation triceratops-like dinosaur (perhaps a new type of ceratopsid) found in 2007 was carbon-14 dated by the University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry and found to be 39,230 ± 140 years old.
• Another Hell Creek formation dinosaur, found in 2004, a triceratops, was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry in 2009 as 24,340 ± 70 years old.
• An apatosaurus was found in late Jurassic strata of the Morrison formation, and excavation was done in 2007 and 2009. In 2011 the University of Georgia dated the fossil to 38,250 ± 160 years old.
• A hadrosaur’s hip bone was found in 2011 in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia dated a sample from this bone to be 37,660 ± 160 years old.
• In 2012 a triceratops horn was found. The University of Georgia dated the fossil to be 33,570 ± 120 years old.
• A femur bone from a hardosaur in 2004 was found in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry dated the sample to 25,670 ± 220 years old.
• An acrocanthosaurus (carnivorous dinosaur) specimen was excavated in 1984 near Glen Rose, Texas and was tested in 2010 by the University of Georgia. It was found to be 29,690 ± 90 years old.

Are the dates beyond the range of testing technology? No, the University of Georgia had extended the maximum limit up over 50,000 years, and the ages were all well below this. Are the ages still too old? After all, even though these ages are much younger than conventional ages, many creationists believe life on earth to be much younger than even the reported carbon-14 ages of these dinosaur fossils. This question will be dealt with in a later section of this article.

Another question that might come up with respect to these studies is the issue of contamination. If young organic material became mixed with the dinosaur material that was carbon-14 dated, then the younger material would skew the result to a younger age.

Special care was taken to prevent this kind of contamination.

Bones were cleaned by ultrasonics.

• Then the bone was crushed and acetic acid was applied to remove any possible external contamination (carbonates).
• Hydrochloric acid was added to dissolve the bone and release carbon dioxide, which was then chemically treated to produce graphite. This graphite was then tested for carbon-14. 7

Another report shows that a mosasaur was dated at about 24,000 years old; 8 , 9 this result was blamed on bacterial contamination, though no bacteria were discovered. 10 , 11

How Creationists Lie To Us - Carbon Dating Hoax

The claim that a dinosaur fossil was carbon-dated is a hoax designed to mislead the scientifically illiterate, so of course, it is popular with creationists.

rosarubicondior.blogspot.com

Debunking it lol

 

[pjmret]

You claim science adjusts but you are wrong. Rather than accept the fact that evolutionist a priori age speculations about dinosaurs were proven wrong by soft tissues, the thick-headed evolutionists changed their scientific speculations on the shelf life of soft tissues to accommodate their erroneous old age speculations. Recent scientific research has shown that dinosaur bones are not as old as evolutionists erroneously imagined for years.

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils | TASC (tasc-creationscience.org) Nov 2013

Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils

November 2013

By

Joe Spears MS

Dinosaurs

Fossils

Radioactive Decay

Radiometric Dating

Dinosaurs supposedly died out 65 million years ago.
What if they didn’t?

Hugh Miller and others authored a paper detailing the results of carbon-14 dating of dinosaur fossils which was presented at the Western Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 2012. 3 , 4 The ages for the dinosaur fossils presented in this paper were far younger than the conventionally accepted ages. Each of the two thousand meeting participants was given a disc which included the abstract of the carbon-14 dating report. However, the abstract of the Miller presentation was removed from the website for the conference. 1 , 5 Why is the information presented in the paper important? If the accepted ages of millions of years for dinosaurs were to be found to be in error, this would be a problem to evolution. The dinosaur dates reported below and discussed in the AOGS 2012 paper discussed throughout this article, included triceratops, hadrosaur, allosaurus, and acrocanthasaurs. Below is a list of some dinosaur fossils and their dated ages from the Miller paper. 6

• An allosaurus from the Morrison formation, late Jurassic, found in 1989 was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry. The age was found to be 31,360 ± 100 years old.
• The femur of an Upper Creataceous Hell Creek formation triceratops-like dinosaur (perhaps a new type of ceratopsid) found in 2007 was carbon-14 dated by the University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry and found to be 39,230 ± 140 years old.
• Another Hell Creek formation dinosaur, found in 2004, a triceratops, was dated by the University of Georgia by accelerator mass spectrometry in 2009 as 24,340 ± 70 years old.
• An apatosaurus was found in late Jurassic strata of the Morrison formation, and excavation was done in 2007 and 2009. In 2011 the University of Georgia dated the fossil to 38,250 ± 160 years old.
• A hadrosaur’s hip bone was found in 2011 in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia dated a sample from this bone to be 37,660 ± 160 years old.
• In 2012 a triceratops horn was found. The University of Georgia dated the fossil to be 33,570 ± 120 years old.
• A femur bone from a hardosaur in 2004 was found in the Hell Creek formation. The University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry dated the sample to 25,670 ± 220 years old.
• An acrocanthosaurus (carnivorous dinosaur) specimen was excavated in 1984 near Glen Rose, Texas and was tested in 2010 by the University of Georgia. It was found to be 29,690 ± 90 years old.

Are the dates beyond the range of testing technology? No, the University of Georgia had extended the maximum limit up over 50,000 years, and the ages were all well below this. Are the ages still too old? After all, even though these ages are much younger than conventional ages, many creationists believe life on earth to be much younger than even the reported carbon-14 ages of these dinosaur fossils. This question will be dealt with in a later section of this article.

Another question that might come up with respect to these studies is the issue of contamination. If young organic material became mixed with the dinosaur material that was carbon-14 dated, then the younger material would skew the result to a younger age.

Special care was taken to prevent this kind of contamination.

Bones were cleaned by ultrasonics.

• Then the bone was crushed and acetic acid was applied to remove any possible external contamination (carbonates).
• Hydrochloric acid was added to dissolve the bone and release carbon dioxide, which was then chemically treated to produce graphite. This graphite was then tested for carbon-14. 7

Another report shows that a mosasaur was dated at about 24,000 years old; 8 , 9 this result was blamed on bacterial contamination, though no bacteria were discovered. 10 , 11

https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/10/dinosaur-bones-and-radiocar-bunkum/

Debunking it lol

 

[Gabriel_Bell]

Even if anthropologists find videotapes of prehistoric humans doing the macarena with T Rexes, that will not prove that a human were condemned forever for eating the forbidden fruit because a talking snake put him up to it.

 

[mark francis]

Scientists always adjusting to new evidence that's exactly how science works like God you are so stupid

If scientists had been wise and honest they would have accepted the obvious fact that the discovery of dinosaur soft tissues destroyed old age assumptions about dinosaurs.