Page 6 |
|
|
Music: |
|
3,000,000
Years
or
3000 Years?
They
used potassium argon, and other methods, and dated the
fossils again. They did this many times, using a different
dating method each time. The results were as much as 150
million years different from each other! - how’s
that for an "exact" science? Then they picked
the date they liked best, based upon their preconceived
notion of how old their theory says the fossil should
be (based upon the Geologic column). So they start with
the assumption that dinosaurs lived millions of years
ago, then manipulate the results until they agree with
their conclusion. Their assumptions dictate their conclusions.
So why is it that if the date doesn't fit the theory,
they change the facts!
Unbiased science changes the theory to support the facts.
They should not change the facts to fit the theory. A
Dinosaur carbon dated at 9,890 and 16,000 years old is
NOT millions of years old as they claim. There is documentation
of an Allosaurus bone that was sent to The University
of Arizona to be carbon dated. The results were 9,890
+/- 60 years and 16,120 +/- 220 years."We didn't
tell them that the bones they were dating were dinosaur
bones." The result was sample B at 16,120 years.
The Allosaurus dinosaur was supposed to be around 140,000,000
years. The samples of bone were blind samples. What does
this say for their entire theory? Isn't it all based on
the ages of these extinct species in historical order
of evolution? So how does this radio carbon process work
anyway?
|
|
|
Radioactive
carbon is produced when nitrogen 14 is bombarded by cosmic
rays in the atmosphere, drifts down to earth and is absorbed
from the air by plants. Animals eat the plants and take
C14 into their bodies. Humans in turn take carbon 14 into
their bodies by eating both plants and animals. When a
living organism dies, it stops absorbing C14 and the C14
that is already in the object begins to disintegrate.
Scientists can use this fact to measure how much C14 has
disintegrated and how much is left in the object. Carbon
14 decays at a slow but steady rate and reverts to nitrogen
14 as long as the sample isn't contaminated (very important).
The rate at which Carbon decays (Half-life) is known:
C14 has a half-life of 5730 years. This means that half
of the original amount of C14 in organic matter will have
disintegrated 5730 years after the organism’s death;
half of the remaining C14 will have disintegrated after
another 5730 years and so forth. After about 50,000 years,
the amount of C14 remaining will be so small that the
fossil can't be dated. If there is any contamination of
the specimen, the results can be unreliable. If, for example,
a world wide event caused carbon levels to rise dramatically
and this carbon ended up in the sample(s). An age difference
of thousands of years will result. |
The well documented carbon 14 blunder of 1988
The
shroud of Turin was carbon dated in 1988. The results
of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich
yielded a calibrated calendar age range with at least
95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin to
AD 1260 - 1390. The scientists happily announced "These
results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the
linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval." Of course,
as usual, the public and the rest of the scientific community
accepted these findings and were able to finally "put
to rest" the question of whether or not this famous
artifact is genuine or not. One major fact about the shroud
that they DID NOT discuss to the public was that to-date
no one has conclusively determined exactly how these mediaeval
"genius' " pulled off creating all of the unexplainable
markings on this linen. There have never been any pigments
found and in fact, this artifact
has been the most baffling relic scientists have ever
studied.
New information recently discussed in National
Geographic News (April 9, 2004), in a PBS documentary
("Secrets of the Dead: The Shroud of Turin,"
April 7, 2004) and in several recent papers show that
"The Shroud of Turin has not
been successfully carbon 14 dated. It seems that what
was tested was nothing more than a mixture of thread from
a medieval patch" (historical documentation suggests
that the repair was made around 1530). If they had tested
only the original threads, a different outcome would have
resulted.
|
An
excellent website which explains in detail the facts about
how the shroud was not
tested properly and subsequent announcements that is was
of
mediaeval
origin can be accessed by clicking on
the picture of the shroud to the right. It is my personal
belief after reading the book "The shroud of turin"
(in which scientists simply could not provide any solid
evidence as to how the image was created) and researching
dozens of reputable web sites on the subject that this
holy relic is in fact genuine. Both Mary's were attending
Jesus' body after he was placed in the tomb and were the
first to enter it after the resurrection. It has been
documented that they took the cloth and kept it safe where
it eventually ended up in Turin.
The fact that every described atrocity committed against
Jesus has been documented not only in the bible but also
in roman records of the day are further indicated by markings
on the shroud itself directly collaborating these facts
makes the possibility that this cloth is somehow a fake
extremely unlikely. I find it disgusting how scientists
handled the entire process which ended with their landmark
announcement that it was a fake while all along their
methods determining these facts were in error. The truth
about what they announced has more to do with the protection
of the scientific community's position on evolution.
If there was the possibility that the shroud was genuine
and that this further alluded that Jesus did actually
resurrect, this would have enormous implications for the
scientific community and more importantly for the public
at large which as usual just believe whatever they are
told to believe because the "experts" have said
it so it must be right? I tend to believe that
the scientific community is influenced by the PTB in many
fields and the news media is really a mind control
tool which they use to consistently pump stories
designed to fulfill their agenda and keep the public in
the dark about what is really going on in the world.
|
Click
above to read more about
this on the factsplusfacts website. |
|
