From: Craig Rusbult (craig@chem.wisc.edu)
Date: Tue Oct 07 2003 - 11:32:21 EDT
Glenn says,
>When you explain why the isotopes change with a lowering of topography (or
>raising depending on the direction one looks), then you have the beginnings
>of a coherent theory.
In Impact #364, John Baumgardner says, re: correlations between
geological context and isotopic ratios:
>In view of the profound significance of these AMS 14C measurements, the ICR
>Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE) team has undertaken its own
>AMS 14C analyses of such fossil material.2 The first set of samples
>consisted of ten coals obtained from the U. S. Department of Energy Coal
>Sample Bank maintained at the Pennsylvania State University. The ten samples
>include three coals from the Eocene part of the geological record, three
>from the Cretaceous, and four from the Pennsylvanian. These samples were
>analyzed by one of the foremost AMS laboratories in the world. Figure 1
>below shows in histogram form the results of these analyses.
>These values fall squarely within the range already established in the
>peer-reviewed radiocarbon literature. When we average our results over each
>geological interval, we obtain remarkably similar values of 0.26 percent
>modern carbon (pmc) for Eocene, 0.21 pmc for Cretaceous, and 0.27 pmc for
>Pennsylvanian. Although the number of samples is small, we observe little
>difference in 14C level as a function of position in the geological record.
>This is consistent with the young-earth view that the entire macrofossil
>record up to the upper Cenozoic is the product of the Genesis Flood and
>therefore such fossils should share a common 14C age.
Is this data accurate? Is there an old-earth explanation for it?
Are there web-pages with good old-earth analyses of this?
Craig
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Oct 07 2003 - 11:32:12 EDT