Darwinists Respond to Study w/Censorship

[Aaron]

"A team of researchers gave a presentation at the 2012 Western Pacific Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 13–17, at which they gave 14C dating results from many bone samples from eight dinosaur specimens. All gave dates ranging from 22,000 to 39,000 years, right in the ‘ballpark’ predicted by creationists. But if dinosaurs really were millions of years old, there should not be one atom of 14C left in them."

http://creation.com/c14-dinos

 

[pinoybaptist]

"A team of researchers gave a presentation at the 2012 Western Pacific Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 13–17, at which they gave 14C dating results from many bone samples from eight dinosaur specimens. All gave dates ranging from 22,000 to 39,000 years, right in the ‘ballpark’ predicted by creationists. But if dinosaurs really were millions of years old, there should not be one atom of 14C left in them."

http://creation.com/c14-dinos

Hoooonesty, is such a lonely word, everyone is sooo untrue.....song by another atheist back in the early 80's.

 

[Deacon]

A web search quickly brings up this article.

"DIRECT RADIOCARBON DATING OF DINOSAUR BONES AND OTHER FOSSILS-same radiocarbon age-range as that for megafauna."

The original article and research was done before 2005.
Interestingly enough a former professor of mine is named in the article (Dr. Wayne Frair).

The paper brings up more questions than it answers - I can see why it was withdrawn, it's sort of like a team asking the teacher, "What did we do wrong?"

Rob

 

[Aaron]

I can see why it was withdrawn....

So can I. It doesn't fit the narrative.

 

[Aaron]

"But if dinosaurs really were millions of years old, there should not be one atom of 14C left in them."

http://creation.com/c14-dinos

And neither would there be soft tissue, but, alas, that doesn't stop Darwinists special pleading to explain soft remnants of blood vessel walls inside a T-Rex bone.

That too is easy enought to look up.