ericmurphy
Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote (Russell @ Nov. 10 2006,18:09) | ericmurphy | Quote | | Can anyone see why this might present a problem for Dave's "hypothesis"? |
Yeah, I see a number of problems. But - and forgive me if this is covering well-trod ground; I have to admit I haven't always followed with rapt attention - doesn't davy have to come up with some way that the 14C/12C has to be radically different from the present? How different would that have to be? And what could account for such a difference? |
Dave has never, to my knowledge, explained why a higher partial pressure of CO2 in the pre-flood atmosphere would have any effect whatsoever on the C12/C14 ratios determined through radiocarbon dating. However, the "paper" he cites, by John Baumgardner, Ph.D., points up what appears to me to be a surprising level of ignorance on the part of Dr. Baumgardner.
Baumgardner claims, as does Dave, that the fact that even very old carbon sources, such as Pennsylvanian coal seams, contain some C14 is inexplicable under old-earth theories. Correct me if I'm wrong, Deadman, but doesn't this claim imply that both Dr. Baumgardner and Dave are unaware that C14 is constantly manufactured in the atmosphere and underground by natural processes?
The reason we don't see, e.g., naturally-occurring Plutonium 239 is because Pu-239 has a half-life of ~20,000 years, and no naturally-occurring process manufactures fresh Pu-239. With an earth 230,000 Pu-239 half-lives old, it would be surprising if there was more than a few such nuclei left anywhere on earth. C14, with a half-life of 5,700 years, should be entirely absent if it were not constantly being replenished by ongoing natural processes.
I can't imagine a Ph.D. would be unaware of this, so I can only assume Dr. Baumgardner knows his argument is fallacious but assumes dupes like Dave won't know this.
--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity
"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams
|
