Carbon dating dinosaur soft tissue Free quick web cam sex on skype
However, analysis using radiometric dating -- the method scientists use to determine the age of fossils -- conflicts with the idea of a 10,000-year-old Earth.
In interviews, Schweitzer has commented that her discoveries have enriched rather than conflicted with her Christian faith [source: Yeoman, Fields].
It came to the conclusion that Schweitzer's samples contained framboids, and the apparent soft tissue was essentially pond scum.
well above the bone strata; this suggests that the RC date for the bones was reliable as clay acts as a barrier. Significant age discrepancies between C-14 and other radiometric techniques In spite of sometimes erratic C-14 dates, there are far more controversial dates when C-14 datable material or historical dates for magma flows are compared with potassium/argon dates. Lovering et al., the K/Ar dates for tektites ranged from 700,000 B. Fission-track dating ranged from 30,000 to 800,000 BP and was interpreted as consistent with K/Ar ages. Gill, had RC dated charcoal and calcareous nodules as they were found with "australites." Thus Lovering et al. Helens in the United States ranged from 350,000 to 2,700,000 years BP using K/Ar dating according to G. Had carbon-datable material been RC dated from the cores such as shells, carbonized wood, amber, charcoal and bones, would they have discovered a date much closer to the present as with the australites or as with the wood buried deep in the Prudhoe Bay permafrost?After Schweitzer's first paper appeared in Science, some critics suggested that she published it before conducting enough analysis.Schweitzer agreed with this claim at least in part.She explained that the team published its findings as step to securing funding for later work [source: Yeoman].
A response to Schweitzer's 2007 paper -- the one reporting the presence of protein -- points out several questions about the findings, including the likelihood of contamination.Schweitzer's 2008 paper describing protein sequences adds some weight to the idea that the tissue belonged to the T. In the minds of many, the presence of peptides in a specimen as old as a T. This means the only option is that the protein came from another source.