### C14 dating of dinosaur bones

in fact, they say that birds are dinosaurs—colorful, incredibly diverse, cute little feathered dinosaurs. they first seized upon schweitzer’s work after she wrote an article for the popular science magazine earth in 1997 about possible red blood cells in her dinosaur specimens. the research team sampled dinosaur bones from eight specimens, perhaps further research needs to be undertaken to confirm this crucial research. sellers work has been subjected to "sufficient" peer review and should be accepted as is, and further that this work has some groundbreaking relevance to age determination of dinosaur fossils. it a problem with radiometric dating that carbon 14 is found in materials dated to millions of years old? said the motivation for their research on dinosaur bones was these recent unexpected finds:+c14 has been reported from mesozoic, paleozoid carbonaceous earth materials. the half-life of carbon-14 is only 5,730 years, so carbon-14 dating is only effective on samples that are less than 50,000 years old. from louis jacobs, southern methodist university, former president of the society of vertebrate paleontology:Co-occurrence of men and dinosaurs. the dinosaur ages now be said to be precisely what the carbon-14 dating results indicated? what they got was a date for the shellac, not the dinosaur fossils. creationists doing radiometric dating are similar to terrorists flying airplanes----the goal is to crash, not do arrive safely at a destination. initially thought she would study how the microscopic structure of dinosaur bones differs depending on how much the animal weighs. sellers' work to the actual age determination of dinosaurs, his method is simply the wrong tool for the job. growing up in helena, montana, she went through a phase when, like many kids, she was fascinated by dinosaurs. far as anyone can tell, schweitzer was right: bob the dinosaur really did have a store of medullary bone when she died. frozen musk ox found at fairbanks creek, alaska, had scalp muscle tissue 24,000 years old and hair 17,200 years old according to carbon-14 dating.

## Radiometric dating of dinosaur bones

1991, schweitzer was trying to study thin slices of bones from a 65-million-year-old t.. k-ar dates are given, this comes from dating nearby volcanic outflows or ashfalls.” finally, through her irritation, she realized what she had: a fragment of dinosaur soft tissue left behind when the mineral bone around it had dissolved. the chemical makeup of proteins changes through evolution, scientists can study protein sequences to learn more about how dinosaurs evolved. results corroborated established paleontological theories that assert that these fossiles presumably were 'washed away' over long periods of time by ground water, replacing the original bones with other substances such as the minerals naturally present in the water, implying that this sample could not tell you anything about when a dinosaur lived (or rather, died). 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. before female birds start to lay eggs, they form a calcium-rich structure called medullary bone on the inside of their leg and other bones; they draw on it during the breeding season to make eggshells.-14 dating was recently performed on dinosaur fossils,1 and the results were presented at the western geophysics meeting in singapore, august 2012, a gathering of approximately two thousand scientists. that statement would be true if the dinosaurs were really millions of years old. wittmeyer, from much experience with the press since the discovery, calls this “the awful question”—whether schweitzer’s work is paving the road to a real-life version of science fiction’s jurassic park, where dinosaurs were regenerated from dna preserved in amber. findings about dinosaur fossils are just a piece of the evidence indicating assumed ages are perhaps mistaken. of the report’s physicist co-authors, professor dr robert bennett and dr jean de pontcharra, till recently with the french atomic energy commission’s grenoble research centre, are urging colleagues to do their own carbon dating of dinosaur bones. 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. schweitzer and wittmeyer have been using antibodies to chicken collagen, cow elastin and ostrich hemoglobin to search for similar molecules in the dinosaur tissue. were informed by a professor from the university of arizona that the samples were heavily contaminated, and that no collagen (where most of the carbon for $^{14}\text{c}$ dating comes from) was present. dinosaur bones, on the other hand, are millions of years old -- some fossils are billions of years old.

## Carbon-14 dating dinosaur bones

#### Radiocarbon dating of dinosaur bones

and because proteins do all the work in the body, studying them could someday help scientists understand dinosaur physiology—how their muscles and blood vessels worked, for example. no portuguese paleontologist uses radiocarbon dating when studying dinosaurs fossils. in 2001, they encased a section of the dinosaur and the surrounding dirt in plaster to protect it. in fact, the creationist posed as chemists in order to secure a number of fragments of fossilized dinosaur bone from a museum of natural history, misrepresenting their own research in the process of doing so. and when did you guys begin to trust the results that carbon-14 dating yields anyway? release “dinosaur bones’ carbon-14 dated to less than 40,000 years—censored international conference report” and additional information, newgeology..The point here is that the evidence of carbon-14 dating presented above is not the only evidence indicating that currently accepted dates for dinosaur and other fossils might be wrong.” the observations could shed new light on how dinosaurs evolved and how their muscles and blood vessels worked. but if dinosaurs really were millions of years old, there should not be one atom of 14c left in them. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. creation magazine claimed that schweitzer’s research was “powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. what does it say about science if dating something as 65 million years old when it is less then 100,000 years old becomes an acceptable margin of error? of galena removed t years ago using pb-pb dating2why does radiometric dating tell us the ages of rocks? on countless occasions, experts have dated dinosaur fossils at 60 million years or more. are not dated with carbon-14, yet some researchers have claimed that there is still carbon-14 in the bones. wouldn’t the dinosaurs be too old for carbon-14 dating to work on them?

## Dinosaur Shocker | Science | Smithsonian

now, it is known that $^{14}\text{c}$ decays at a fast enough rate (half-life ~6000 years) for this dating method to be absolutely useless on such samples. the theoretical limit for c-14 dating is 100,000 years using ams, but for practical purposes it is 45,000 to 55,000 years. of the report’s physicist co-authors … are urging colleagues to do their own carbon dating of dinosaur bones. at an october 2005 paleontology conference, schweitzer presented preliminary evidence that she has detected real dinosaur proteins in her specimens. scientists have done studies which suggest that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, but those dates were not arrived at by use of carbon-14 dating methods. there are plenty of dinosaur bones out there that could be tested for c-14—one would hope that other researchers will take up the challenge and perform similar analyses to these researchers. 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. would like to add to joe taylor's report of our cooperative research in excavation, collecting of dinosaur and other fossil specimens for testing for c-14 content. we have also used isochron dating to test for contamination and/or how well the rocks acted as closed systems. furthermore, it appears less than certain that the carbon found in the bones actually had anything to do with them being dinosaur bones. we don’t go to all this effort to dig this stuff out of the ground to then destroy it in acid,” says dinosaur paleontologist thomas holtz jr. dating methods radiometric dating isn't the only method of determining the age of rocks. my understanding, this research may have far greater implications for biblical creationists than the finding of soft tissue on dinosaur bones. understand her dinosaur bone, schweitzer turned to two of the most primitive living birds: ostriches and emus. public has the right to know the actual chronology of the dinosaurs, and indeed the history of the earth. in the summer of 2004, she asked several ostrich breeders for female bones.My ex is dating again and it hurts

### Radiocarbon Dating of Dinosaur Fossils | TASC

. mainstream accepted date for the age of these bones (several dozens of million years old). there are other dating methods, making use of materials with even longer half-lives, such as the potassium=argon method, which have been used in dating dinosaurs. so if dinosaur bones are supposedly 65+ million years old, why is this?) actual age determination of dinosaurs, his method is simply the wrong tool for the job. preferred method of dating dinosaur fossils is with the radiometric dating method.,4 each of the two thousand meeting participants was given a disc which included the abstract of the carbon-14 dating report. the dinosaur dates reported below and discussed in the aogs 2012 paper discussed throughout this article, included triceratops, hadrosaur, allosaurus, and acrocanthasaurs., you might ask, why is this article about carbon-14 dating of dinosaurs? knowing that small concentrations of collagen can attract contamination, they compared precision accelerator mass spectrometry (ams) tests of collagen and bioapatite (hard carbonate bone mineral) with conventional counting methods of large bone fragments from the same dinosaurs. it shows that objects of known age via independent methods and recordings are corroborated by carbon dating. one point that is worth noticing is that these dinosaur ages are all much younger than the conventional ones. them is organic carbon derived from the original dinosaur bone. "comparing such different molecules as minerals and organics from the same bone region, we obtained concordant c-14 results which were well below the upper limits of c-14 dating. over the next three summers, workers chipped away at the dinosaur, gradually removing it from the cliff face., schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. soft tissue should not last 65 million years, yet it has been found in a dinosaur fossil which “has” to be at least that old.