Thursday, April 21, 2016


In 1958 when I first read about creation science questioning evolutionary science I had just finished four semesters of graduate courses in Nuclear Engineering. General Dynamics was designing a nuclear-powered bomber and I thought a Master's in Nuclear would improve my job opportunities. When the project was cancelled I changed degree programs to a MS in Mechanical Engineering. But reading the difference between a universe created 6000 years ago and one created by evolution from a Big Bang 4 billion years ago, I immediately said that we can solve this problem using radioactive dating techniques. I went to the FW Public Library to look at the just published papers on using Carbon 14, C14, as a dating tool. Immediately I had a problem. There are always assumptions in every scientific venture and C14 dating assumed that the C14 in the atmosphere had been constant for 100,000 years, I said that if the earth was only 6000 years old that there would be discontinuities in the dates reported using C14. When I looked at the data available at the time, I saw what looked to me like such a jump in dates.

I would like to see a C14 model use a couple of assumptions. One that there was no C14 in the original atmosphere and that there was little formed during the pre-flood era because the magnetic field deflected more of the high energy particles that are supposed to strike N14 and change the atoms to C14. After the flood and with the changing magnetic field more C14 would be generated down through recent time. Another assumption would be that God created C14 in the original atmosphere and it was absorbed by the abundant plants in the world up to Noah.

Assuming that the coal beds were formed during the flood from burying the abundant and heavy forests that existed in the tropical rain forest climate all over the globe, then the presence of C14 in coal would establish a base line for the dates. Because many trees at that time would have been there from day one, you would have less C14, so that the amount would be less than what would be found in trees or carbon materials after the flood. I want to look at C14 measurements in coal and oil and in material known to be in the last few centuries. We can probably assume that the C14 in the atmosphere has been fairly constant for the last 4000 years.

Now my job is to start researching C14 measurements to find some consistency in the measurements.

Tuesday, April 19, 2016


Here is the latest news on obtaining C14 dates.
Dating of artifacts and fossils may become much more common thanks to a new instrument.
Without doubt, radiocarbon dating has been an exciting and contentious process. It has been able to resolve disputes about the construction date of archaeological sites, such as Hezekiah’s Tunnel in Jerusalem (9/10/03). Creationists find radiocarbon all over in places it shouldn’t be (see Real Science Radio’s list), such as coal and diamonds; evolutionists cry “contamination!” (Note: all radiocarbon should vanish from a sample before 100,000 years). Resolving disputes has been costly and time-consuming. Typically, the best results come from labs with equipment for accelerator mass spectroscopy (AMS), but only 100 or so labs worldwide have the equipment.
What would happen if you could get radiocarbon dates almost as accurate as AMS at one tenth the cost, within two hours? This may become common, if the encouraging announcement from Italy’s Istituto Nazionale di Ottica lives up to its promises. Science Daily says,
The instrument, which uses a new approach called saturated-absorption cavity ring-down (SCAR), is described in The Optical Society’s journal for high impact research, Optica. SCAR offers significant time and cost savings compared to the standard approach for carbon dating and could be useful for a host of other applications such as measuring emissions from fossil fuels or certifying the amount of biogenic content in biofuels.. 
I posted the entire story on my Facebook page today.

Sunday, April 10, 2016


This is more evidence for the creation science model of a young earth. According to our creation model all animals and mankind ate only vegetation before the Flood. I believe that these dogs were pre-flood animals. Here is some of the story copied from Creation Ministries site:

They say these dogs are 12,400 years old, but their organs and fur are intact, along with remains of their last meal.
Permafrost is thawing in Russia, and with it, astonishing discoveries of animals and plants from long ago. Siberia’s frozen mammoths are well known, but PhysOrg reports that the discovery of two exquisitely-preserved puppies is a first:
To find a carnivorous mammal intact with skin, fur and internal organs—this has never happened before in history,” said Sergei Fyodorov, head of exhibitions at the Mammoth Museum of the North-Eastern Federal University in the regional capital of Yakutsk.
Be assured that this is not an April Fool prank. It’s been reported in Discovery NewsScience Alert, and The Guardian. Well, maybe the latter’s headline “Bark to the Future” is over the line, along with suggestions the find will reveal something about “canine evolution,” but really: scientists are eagerly examining the remains, dubbed the “Tumat puppies” after the nearest village. They are hoping to do genomic testing and compare the dogs’ brains with those of modern dogs. The newly discovered specimen appears to be from the same litter as one found in 2011.
The most complete report with the most photos is in the Siberian Times, with a video clip of scientists holding and cleaning the specimen, chattering in Russian and English. Apparent butchering marks on some nearby mammoth bones, along with evidence of fire, suggest that humans were on the scene. Maybe these were domesticated dogs, at least partially.
Dates of 12,400 years are being assigned to the carcasses. Preservation of puppies is rare, the reports say, because they have thin bones and delicate skulls. What did it eat for its last meal? “When we opened it [the stomach], we were very surprised. The second puppy’s stomach is mostly full of twigs and grass,” Fyodorov said. He thinks “perhaps the animals were not exclusively carnivorous or whether they started eating grass after they were trapped by a mudslide and began to starve.”
- See more at: