Three Zeros Too Many ?

Here's where you get off topic and off center....Keep it nice, keep it clean, no sniping, no flaming. After that, anything goes.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby uniface » Thu Apr 21, 2016 6:48 am

A Triceratops brow horn discovered in Dawson County, Montana, has been controversially dated to around 33,500 years, challenging the view that dinosaurs died out around 65 million years ago. The finding radically suggests that early humans may have once walked the earth with the fearsome reptiles thousands of years ago.

The Triceratops brow horn was excavated in May 2012 and stored at the Glendive Dinosaur and Fossil Museum. The Museum, which has since 2005 been in cooperation with the Paleochronology Group, a team of consultants in geology, paleontology, chemistry, engineering, and education, sent a sample of the outer portion of the Triceratops brow horn to Head of the Paleochronology Group Hugh Miller, at his request, in order to carry out Carbon-14 dating. Mr Miller sent the sample to the University of Georgia, Center for Applied Isotope Studies, for this purpose. The sample was divided at the lab into two fractions with the “bulk” or collagen break down products yielding an age of 33,570 ± 120 years and the carbonate fraction of bone bioapatite yielding an age of 41,010 ± 220 years [UGAMS-11752 & 11752a]. Mr Miller told Ancient Origins that it is always desirable to carbon-14 date several fractions to minimize the possibility of errors which Miller requested and that essential concordance was achieved in the 1000's of years as with all bone fractions of ten other dinosaurs.

Triceratops, a name meaning “three-horned face”, is a genus of herbivorous ceratopsid dinosaur that is said to have first appeared during the late Maastrichtian stage of the late Cretaceous period, about 68 million years ago in what is now North America, and became extinct in the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago. However, scientists from the Paleochronology Group, who perform research relating to “anomalies of science”, maintain that dinosaurs did not die out millions of years ago and that there is substantial evidence that they were still alive as recently as 23,000 years ago.

Until recently, Carbon-14 dating was never used to test dinosaur bones, as the analysis is only reliable up to 55,000 years. Scientists never considered it worthwhile to run the test since it is generally believed that dinosaurs have been extinct for 65 million years, based on radiometric dating of the volcanic layers above or below fossils, a method which the Paleochronology Group states has “serious problems and gross assumptions must be made”.

"It became clear years ago that paleontologists were not just neglecting to test dinosaur bones for C-14 content but were refusing to. Normally a good scientist will be curious about the ages of important fossil bones,” Mr Miller told Ancient Origins in an email.

The results of the Triceratops Horn analysis are not unique. According to Mr Miller, numerous C-14 tests have now been carried out on dinosaur bones, and surprisingly, they all returned results dating back in the thousands rather than millions of years.

I organized the Paleochronology group in 2003 to fill a void with regards fossil wood and dinosaur bones as I was curious as to their age by C-14 dating. We thus have used C-14 dating to solve the mystery why soft tissue and dinosaur depictions exist world-wide. Our model predicted dinosaur bones would have significant C-14 and indeed they did in the range of 22,000 to 39,000 years BP,” Mr Miller added.

Numerous independent researchers have long argued that there is evidence man and dinosaur once walked the Earth together, such as hundreds of ancient artworks and artifacts that appear to depict dinosaurs, long before modern science had pieced together dinosaur fossils and conducted analyses to produce detailed reconstructions of their appearance.

However, even more intriguing is the discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur fossils. In the March 2005 issue of Science, paleontologist Mary Schweitzer and her team announced the discovery of soft tissue inside a 68-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus rex leg bone from the Hell Creek Formation in Montana, a controversial finding considering scientists had thought soft tissue proteins degrade in less than 1 million years in the best of conditions. After recovery, the tissue was rehydrated by the science team and testing revealed evidence of intact structures such as blood vessels, bone matrix, and connective tissue.

More recently, Mark Armitage and Kevin Anderson published results of a microscopic analysis of soft tissue from a Triceratops horn in the peer-reviewed journal Acta Histochemica. Mr Armitage, a creationist, claimed that the preservation of cells is a scientific impossibility if the dinosaur really walked the Earth over 66 million years ago. On this basis, he opened a discussion with colleagues and students about the implications of such a finding being that the creationist perspective is correct and that dinosaurs existed much later than mainstream science maintains, a move that promptly saw him fired by the University of California.

While the Paleochronology Group says it is not “of any particular creed or denomination”, there are undoubtedly those with creationist beliefs among the group, a fact which critics may say could bias their results. Nevertheless, the group has urged any and all scientists to replicate their results by carrying out rigorous C-14 testing on any dinosaur sample.

Every sample tested yielded significant original Carbon-14 by extensive cross-checking of their ages in bone collagen, bulk organics and carbonate from bone bioapatite on AMS units and obtained concordance. Thus, the overwhelming odds are that most if not all unpetrified or even supposed petrified dinosaur bones in museum and university collections will show the same result,” Mr Miller told Ancient Origins. “We urge therefore that all those in charge of such collections see if they can replicate our findings. The implications are immense.”

The challenge, so far, has been met with rejection, and previous attempts to publish C-14 test results were repeatedly blocked. Raw data without interpretation was blocked from presentation in conference proceedings by the 2009 North American Paleontological Convention, the American Geophysical Union in 2011 and 2012, the Geological Society of America in 2011 and 2012, and by the editors of various scientific journals. The Center for Applied Isotope Studies at the University of Georgia, who conducted ‘blind’ C-14 tests on dinosaur bones, without knowing what they were, refused to conduct further C-14 tests after finding they were testing dinosaur bones. Paleontologist Jack Horner, curator at Montana State University’s Museum of the Rockies, who excavated the Tyrannosaurus Rex remains that contained soft tissue, even turned down an offer of a $23,000 grant to carry out a C-14 test on the remains.

“[T]he public should be made aware that the discovery of soft tissue, C-14 in dinosaur bones and dinosaur depictions world-wild renders current beliefs about how old they are obsolete,” said Mr Miller. “Science is about sharing evidence, and letting the chips fall where they may.”

While there is a possibility that the C-14 test results were a result of contamination or error, (even though the results were replicated and rigorous pre-treatments were carried out by the University of Georgia to control for this), or are perhaps due to some other factor not currently understood by science, it seems reasonable to expect scientists to attempt replication of such groundbreaking test results. Failure to investigate or even acknowledge such significant findings unfortunately suggests that some scientists are more interested in holding on tight to current perspectives, rather than seeking to advance knowledge and understanding in this field.

http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/humans-walk-earth-dinosaurs-triceratops-horn-dated-33500-020159?nopaging=1
uniface
 

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby uniface » Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:15 am

The silence is deafening.
uniface
 

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby Tiompan » Sun Apr 24, 2016 11:33 am

uniface wrote:The silence is deafening.



Do you always accept the bullshit and never investigate what immeduately sounds incredibly dodgy . ?
This is very old hat was blown out of the water as soon as it appeared . You apparently have just discovered it .
Armitage ,a scientist ? See
[americanloons.blogspot.com]
Tiompan
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby Minimalist » Sun Apr 24, 2016 5:31 pm

We cannot pass over Mark H. Armitage, however. Armitage was an Adjunct Professor of Biology at Azusa Pacific University, a religious college, and received a “Masters Degree” from the regionally unaccredited Institute for Creation Research. Graduate School. Currently Armitage is affiliated with the Creation Research Society, and operates and maintains a working electron microscopy lab there (what a waste of resources), as well as serving on the Board of Directors.



Sadly, Uni's standard seems to be roughly "Would I like it to be true? Then its true!"
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin
Minimalist
 
Posts: 15445
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby uniface » Sun Apr 24, 2016 8:18 pm

The announcer on TV is not the news itself.

Or is that too complex an idea for you to get your head wrapped around ?

It's about DATA. Not the kind of Examiner sidebar stuff you get absorbed in to where you lose sight of that's at issue.
uniface
 

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby Tiompan » Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:40 am

"The announcer on TV is not the news itself."

Armitage was not the news reader , he made the news i.e. he found the tissue and published the paper .

“It's about DATA. “
The results were even questioned by Christians , embarrassed by the creationists .

It’s the data that is the problem .
At the most basic level we know when Triceratrops were around . 65 million YA ,and the horn was found in strata dated to 65-million -70 million ya , to consider using RC dating ,which is limited to a fraction of that time span is as ridiculous as giving a cow a lie detector test , an IQ test for SOTT readers ,or measure decibels with a ruler .

Dino fossils or surviving dino soft tissue are dated by convergent methods and RC dating is not one of them .
If there were dinos around up to 50,000 YA don’t you think we might have found some convergent evidence to support that ?
Tiompan
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby Minimalist » Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:08 pm

It's about time for the "jesus is testing our faith" retort. They are rarely late with that one!
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin
Minimalist
 
Posts: 15445
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby Tiompan » Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:12 am

How do those who believe in an homin presence in America c 50,000 BP get on with creationists with their view that the earth is younger than 30,000 years ,

See .
http://www.proof-of-evolution.com/soft- ... -horn.html
Scroll down to August 14 where Armitage , of Triceratrops horn fame says , “I don't know that I have said anywhere that I think the Earth is 7,000 years old - I would be comfortable with 10,000 to 20,000 years “

Maybe there is only one .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby uniface » Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:22 am

The results were even questioned by Christians , embarrassed by the creationists.


What does that have to do with lab results ?

(Answer: nothing)

It’s the data that is the problem .
At the most basic level we know when Triceratrops were around . 65 million YA ,and the horn was found in strata dated to 65-million -70 million ya , to consider using RC dating ,which is limited to a fraction of that time span is as ridiculous as giving a cow a lie detector test , an IQ test for SOTT readers ,or measure decibels with a ruler.


In other words, what people believe about it over-rules what the 14C testing reveals.

Welcome back to the Middle Ages. :roll:
uniface
 

Re: Three Zeros Too Many ?

Postby Tiompan » Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:47 am

"The results were even questioned by Christians , embarrassed by the creationists.[/quote]

What does that have to do with lab results ? (Answer: nothing)

The answer is that idea of using RC dating on fosils and expecting to get a menaingfull is idiotic ,the only people daft enough to believe ae creatioists and their fellow christians get embarrassed by that .



It’s the data that is the problem .
At the most basic level we know when Triceratrops were around . 65 million YA ,and the horn was found in strata dated to 65-million -70 million ya , to consider using RC dating ,which is limited to a fraction of that time span is as ridiculous as giving a cow a lie detector test , an IQ test for SOTT readers ,or measure decibels with a ruler.


In other words, what people believe about it over-rules what the 14C testing reveals.

You don't get it do you ? using rc dating on something that is million of years is a joke , try it on coal you'll get results but it won't tell you the age of the coal .
The only people who would attempt that then believe the results it are the nut jobs .
Tiompan
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:13 am


Return to The 'Everything Else' Forum.....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron