Carbon dating dinosaur
However, the evidence fits well with the Bible's straightforward history of just thousands of years.The message from science on the age of fossilized remains is getting clearer, and it is lining up with the Bible even better than expected.But many of these studies relied on only a few different detection methods.Now, a team of researchers using special equipment at the MAX-lab in Lund, Sweden, has applied more than six different techniques to verify that tissues from inside a Cretaceous mosasaur humerus bone, which was kept in the Royal Institute of Natural Sciences of Belgium "for many years," consist of mosasaur and not microbial molecules. First, the investigators chemically removed the mineral matrix from the mosasaur bone, leaving behind the proteins and other biomolecules.Radiocarbon Dating Reliability Radiocarbon dating is the most accurate and most verifiable of the radiometric dating systems.Dates for carbon material can often be independently verified by testing something that is known historically, from records of human observations.
Its complete decay would require only thousands of years, assuming a constant decay rate in an undisturbed system.If the source of the carbon was mosasaur tissue (and this is the most straightforward explanation), then the mosasaur's carbon date would be in line with an age of thousands of years, as inferred by the integrity of its soft tissue.If this creature was buried and fossilized as a direct or indirect result of the Genesis Flood, which the Bible indicates occurred on the order of 4,400 years ago, then partly decayed collagen and small amounts of radioactive carbon would be expected.Since the concept of 70 million-year-old flesh sounds so fanciful, many evolutionists have suggested that biological material in fossils came from bacteria instead of being original tissue.Much of this study's investigation, therefore, focused on testing whether or not that was the case with these soft tissues.
Search for carbon dating dinosaur:
The investigators were interested to know whether any DNA present inside the bone would be bacterial or fungal.