Notices
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: carbon dating

  1. #1 carbon dating 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    Does anyone here know anything about carbon dating or whether something like clear clean crystal quartz can be carbon dated?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    I can't say I know much about it. It's got something to do with measuring the amount of loss of carbon molecules of a material. As quarts doesnt contain carbon molecules, I think the method doesnt work on it But maybe they know more about it in the chemistry section.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 re: carbon dating 
    Forum Freshman AdmiralFloyd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    18
    carbon dating can only be used to date organic material. This is because carbon-14 is made when a nutron displaces a proton in a nitrogen-14 neucleus. This is mildly unstable, but since all earth life is carbon based it becomes incorporated into all organic matter. At the time of production this material has a certain average amount of carbon-14 but it slowly reverts (by beta decay) to nitrogen-14, so by the relative quantities of these two elements scientists can tell how long ago the material was constructed.

    However, i have just done some research for you and found out this...

    Thermoluminescence (TL) dating is a radiometric method based on the fact that trace amounts of radioactive atoms, such as uranium and thorium, in some kinds of rock, soil, and clay produce constant low amounts of background ionizing radiation. The atoms of crystalline solids, such as pottery and rock, can be altered by this radiation. Specifically, the electrons of quartz, feldspar, diamond, or calcite crystals can become displaced from their normal positions in atoms and trapped in imperfections in the crystal lattice of the rock or clay molecules. These energy charged electrons progressively accumulate over time. When a sample is heated to high temperatures in a laboratory, the trapped electrons are released and return to their normal positions in their atoms. This causes them to give off their stored energy in the form of light impulses (photons). This light is referred to as thermoluminescence (literally "heat light"). A similar effect can be brought about by stimulating the sample with infrared light. The intensity of thermoluminescence is directly related to the amount of accumulated changes produced by background radiation, which, in turn, varies with the age of the sample and the amount of trace radioactive elements it contains.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: re: carbon dating 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by AdmiralFloyd
    carbon dating can only be used to date organic material. This is because carbon-14 is made when a nutron displaces a proton in a nitrogen-14 neucleus. This is mildly unstable, but since all earth life is carbon based it becomes incorporated into all organic matter. At the time of production this material has a certain average amount of carbon-14 but it slowly reverts (by beta decay) to nitrogen-14, so by the relative quantities of these two elements scientists can tell how long ago the material was constructed.

    However, i have just done some research for you and found out this...

    Thermoluminescence (TL) dating is a radiometric method based on the fact that trace amounts of radioactive atoms, such as uranium and thorium, in some kinds of rock, soil, and clay produce constant low amounts of background ionizing radiation. The atoms of crystalline solids, such as pottery and rock, can be altered by this radiation. Specifically, the electrons of quartz, feldspar, diamond, or calcite crystals can become displaced from their normal positions in atoms and trapped in imperfections in the crystal lattice of the rock or clay molecules. These energy charged electrons progressively accumulate over time. When a sample is heated to high temperatures in a laboratory, the trapped electrons are released and return to their normal positions in their atoms. This causes them to give off their stored energy in the form of light impulses (photons). This light is referred to as thermoluminescence (literally "heat light"). A similar effect can be brought about by stimulating the sample with infrared light. The intensity of thermoluminescence is directly related to the amount of accumulated changes produced by background radiation, which, in turn, varies with the age of the sample and the amount of trace radioactive elements it contains.

    Hmm thanks for the help. the reason im curious is because of this crystal skull they found in south america a bunch of years ago. Ive been to joshua shapiros site and i wrote the guy explaining why a lot of the hype he printed was bullshit.http://www.crystalinks.com/crystalskulls.html

    anyways we wrote back and forth a few times and he said something about maybe interviewing me for his new book or some such bullshit again, but he left all the information i debated with successfully, intact on his site. There is another page i couldnt find just now that describes some of the tests they did on the mitchell-hedges skull one of which was carbon dating he said. There are just so many things about this guys story that dont add up.
    lately hes been trying to sell and anatomically precise small crystal skull for 10,000$ he claims some german master carver who would like to keep his name anon is selling thru him. he notes in the article tho that this same carver does carvings for people from all over the world..I just dont buy it. It looks like a skull carved by a chinese carver who leads the production of stone skulls for export in china. i just think the guy and the whole crystal skull thing is hype. and a scam. joshua says it would be impossible to make a quartz skull like the mitchell-hedges skull. Im going to make one that is better.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: re: carbon dating 
    Forum Freshman Starthane Xyzth's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Where I log on
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by VossistArts
    joshua says it would be impossible to make a quartz skull like the mitchell-hedges skull. Im going to make one that is better.
    With modern material science, it might even be possible to adjust the carbon-14 content of molten silica and then crystallise it to form artificially "aged" quartz; thereby fooling carbon dating to pass it off your skull-pture as whatever degree of antiquity you wish.

    BTW, Vossit, can I still order some of your hand-carved jewelry, as you promised in all those concentric private messages of ours?:wink:
    Riding the Darkdrift
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: re: carbon dating 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Starthane Xyzth
    Quote Originally Posted by VossistArts
    joshua says it would be impossible to make a quartz skull like the mitchell-hedges skull. Im going to make one that is better.
    With modern material science, it might even be possible to adjust the carbon-14 content of molten silica and then crystallise it to form artificially "aged" quartz; thereby fooling carbon dating to pass it off your skull-pture as whatever degree of antiquity you wish.

    BTW, Vossit, can I still order some of your hand-carved jewelry, as you promised in all those concentric private messages of ours?[img]http://images5.theimageh
    osting.com/Hthr3.jpg[/img]
    :wink:
    Hi! Of course you can. email me at gusvoss@cableone.net. Id say call but then youd ask me what my plans for the future are and stuff like that.. :P
    Nice to see you btw
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman Starthane Xyzth's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Where I log on
    Posts
    12
    Plans for the future? I don't even know your plans for the present...

    Nice to see you too.
    Riding the Darkdrift
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    6
    http://kecirohomeschool.com/carbondating.htm

    This is how it works... let's say you want a bone to be,
    let's say 100,000 years old, you go through your list
    of dating methods and pick the one that will give you
    what you believe to be 100,000 years. It's still all
    based on assumptions yet you live and die by it as
    if it is fact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    The post above is Creationist propaganda and the included link is more of the same. Creationists employ a variety of dishonest techniques to promote their arguments including:

    1. Distorting the facts.
    2. Omitting certain facts.
    3. Using outdated references.
    4. Attacking ideas that are not actually held.
    5. Creating strawman arguments and attacking these.

    The most honest of them just tell outright lies, which has the advantage of transparency.

    For a balanced view of dating methods contemplate these links:
    http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/radiometric.html
    http://www.palaeos.com/Geochronology...ric_dating.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

    For direct refutation of creationist drivel try here:
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dating.html
    http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html
    The second link is written by an intelligent Christian and scientist.

    Creationist nonsense has no place in a science forum. Freedom of speech is generally considered not to include shouting Fire in a crowded theatre. It should rightly exclude shouting "Young Earth" within a hundred parsecs of a geologist, but I'll waive that right for the present (and the unimaginably long past).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Thank you, Ophiolite, for providing that information.

    I noted that the linked article, which is apparently on some "home schooling" (skoolin'?) website, credited a couple of articles from the journal Science (Keith & Anderson 1963; Riggs 1984). I happend to have both of these papers and the authors were very clear that the disparities in carbon were due to the resevoir effect. This is something that anyone conducting radiocarbon dating is aware of and tests for.

    Creationist arguments amount to nothing more than deception (a.k.a. lies), misinformation, and ignorance. Hovind (if he was, indeed, the author of the article) is clearly guilty of quote mining, something that he and other religious nutters have been guilty of many times in the past.

    But then, historically, cult followers have always been willing to deceive in order to further their myths and fantasies.

    But, regardless, one does not "go down the list of dating methods" in search of one that will give the date one wants. One looks at the situation and the material that is to be dated and determines the best method. If I have a mandible for an Eocene primate and, in the same strata, there is a bit of volcanic material -perhaps some ash-, then I would use potassium/argon or argon/argon dating to determine the last cooling point of the material. If I can assume this material to be deposited at the same relative time as the mandible, I can date the mandible.

    Keith, M.L.; Anderson, G.M. (1963). Radiocarbon dating: fictitious results with mollusk shells. Science, 141(3581), 634-647

    Riggs, A.C. (1984). Major carbon-14 deficiency in modern snail shells from Southern Nevada springs. Science, 224(4644), 58-61.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •