Radioactive dating conflict
No part of the article goes “one part of the Vollosovitch mammoth…”, it’s all a table.Secondly, none of the radiocarbon dates for mammoths given in that table are 44,000 or 29,500.
And what, may I ask, are “major skeletal differences?Given the scans in question are CT scans you would rightly expect that the following examples are CT scans gone wrong.They are not, rendering this entire tangent irrelevant.Pewe, Quaternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 (U. The direct quote is a invented, the figures are false and the mammoth itself wasn’t even found when the source was published. “The lower leg of the Fairbanks Creek mammoth had a radiocarbon age of 15,380 RCY (radio carbon years), while its skin and flesh were 21,300 RCY.” Harold E.Anthony, “Natures Deep Freeze,” Natural History, Sept. 300 Now, I haven’t been able to track down the original source for this so can’t say for sure whether the source does make this claim. 214-228 I’m not really sure how this refutes radiocarbon dating.As Stephen Jay Gould observed: “One can scarcely find a textbook in introductory geology that does not take a swipe at Ussher’s date as the opening comment in an obligatory page or two on older concepts of the earth’s age (before radioactive dating allowed us to get it right).
Other worthies are praised for good tries in a scientific spirit (even if their ages are way off), but Ussher is usually excoriated for biblical idolatry and just plain foolishness” As with the essay on Galileo, I will argue that this interpretation of the events is based largely on a failure to adequately appreciate the scientific and social context of the work.
A cataclysmic event on the order of the Noahic worldwide flood would have had to have been responsible for these giants frozen instantly, intact and well preserved.
They did not freeze to death slowly like animals awaiting a gradual Ice Age or else they would not have been so perfectly preserved encased in ice.
First, the information on mammoth dates is presented in a table.
This means that the direct quote given in is a pure fabrication.
But in case there is a real problem I shall endeavour to only call them CT scans in this post, lest all my readers see “high tech” and become brainwashed.