Radiocarbon Dating

Posted on 21 March 2013 by Admin

  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • comment: 53

A video by the The Rafter Radiocarbon Laboratory NZ regarding carbon dating. Full article and more videos- http://www.eequalsmcsquared.auckland.ac.nz/sites/e…
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Read my vlog at http://jasondchen.com/2013/dating-youtuber-girls-edition/ Thanks to these lovely talented ladies =) Megan Nicole: http://www.youtube.com/mega…
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Comments (53)

  1. GSpotter63 says:

    WOW! Could you imagine how horrible it would be for all the workers in this lab if it were suddenly proven that co2 dating was inaccurate and they would no longer have a job? It would not be the first time that an outdated scientific standard was continued by those that stood to lose $ and power despite the fact that it was proven wrong. (AKA the Earth was the center of the solar system.)

  2. GSpotter63 says:

    Radio carbon dating assumes that the amount of Co14 in the atmosphere has always been the same. But there again, we have no way of verifying that. The fact that insects grew to as much as 8 times their present size indicates that in the past o2 levels and atmosphere pressure was indeed much higher. Would not those higher levels have greatly alter the formation of Co14 in the atmosphere and hence the amount or % of Co14 invalidating that dating method?

  3. louis tournas says:

    How the Earth formed is not part of the theory of evolution. It doesn’t prove there is no god or gods either. How rocks form and their chemistry (geology) doesn’t prove anything about any god either. Creationists are against such notions only bc they see it as a threat to their religion.

  4. jesusfilledphil says:

    Supporters of the theory of evolution say that the rocks on the earth were molten and they gradually cooled down, this is very important to the evolutionists. Biology, geology and the laws of physics, all lead me to the conclusion that GOD created everything and everything has His fingerprints on it, from complex DNA to Phi ratios that occur a lot in nature – If you want to ignore the obvious evidence of your creators handiwork and put it down to chance and luck, that is your prerogative.

  5. louis tournas says:

    Polonium is just a decay product of uranium. It isn’t a big secret. PH has been discovered way before Robert Gentry. Robert Gentry just took the idea to mean that god put the polonium there instantly. Besides, it isn’t related to evolution theory. That goes into the geology category and nuclear physics.

  6. Justwantahover says:

    Just guess the enclosure size and adjust bass sound with bass-port. Have a tube that slides into another tube and adjust length of tube to the bass-sound you like the most. Easy!
    There are instructions on cross-overs on my ch. You have to get “Speaker” cross-over components. It’s all exp, I’ve been doing it for years (by ear) and now I’m fairly exp. Cross-overs control the sound big-time. I also doctor the drive-units themselves and that makes a radical difference. Just by trial and error. lol

  7. Justwantahover says:

    I had a “Star” 8+8 valve amp. The best treble I’ve ever heard. But I went and sold it for a more powerful Sansui valve amp, but it didn’t sound as good and it kept blowing valves. One day (when I can afford it) I’ll grt one. You used to be able to get cheap second-hand (little) valve amps for peanuts but now they are all gone.
    With speaketrs forget about the math and use thoes things on each side of your head. I do. You can make a speaker sound any way I like, with enclosures and cross-overs.

  8. jesusfilledphil says:

    Kent does sound like a hill billy, especially to an Englishman, but what he says makes sense to me. If you know about the PHs doesn’t this alone give you cause to question the whole theory of evolution? I personal don’t think that evolution theory will be perpetuated much longer, something else that is anti God being The Creator will take over (probably that aliens did it).

  9. louis tournas says:

    I have searched a bit and it seems there isn’t a clear case for these artifacts found in coal. I already know about Polonium halos. I ahve seen Kent Hovind video and he doesn’t seem to me as a serious guy. That guy is a total joke.

  10. jesusfilledphil says:

    I had a Leak TL12+ Valve amp and I was hearing new info (tambourines etc) that I couldn’t hear with my transistor amp. I have been trying to design a mos fet class A amplifier but I just cant find the time for tinkering at the moment. When I dabbled with speaker design I discovered that it is a very complex subject and working out the cabinet enclosures took a lot of algebra! Perhaps next time I will use a ‘suck it and see” approach.

  11. Justwantahover says:

    I used to have valve amps (old ones). Thanks for your interest. My big bin speakers are good and easy to make. You have to get ones with 3″ voice-coils so you can fit the tweeters in. The point source makes a lot of difference and really is an experience to hear. That and the two-way makes the difference. Full-ranges don’t go high enough. I have videos on how it’s made. Look up KEF and Cabasse speakers.
    It’s fun arguing, hope you are having fun too! But you can believe what you like. Cheers!

  12. Justwantahover says:

    Sorry for rubbishing a book, but if you didn’t insist that it’s all to be taken literally, I rubbish it in that light. I’m not really rubbishing it any more than a Harry Potter book. But I’m rubbishing your narrow minded aproach to it. If somebody insisted that Harry Potter was for real, I would rubbish the Harry Potter book just as much, by telling him it’s not true etc.
    I sound like Richard Dawkins, you sound like Ken Ham! lol

  13. Justwantahover says:

    What I can’t understand about creationists is that they rant on and insist that we believe something we can’t, when they have no evidence. Then they say that we haven’t any proof. But they don’t realise that they don’t have any evidence (let alone proof). If you had proof, you can say that, but you have just a book. Do you believe that you have proof? Tell us what makes you as certain as I am. I refuse to even consider Harry Potter magic (let alone embrace it).

  14. Justwantahover says:

    Creationist always insist that we believe in the supernatural. Why do you insist that I believe in Harry Potter style magic tricks. There is enough magic in the big bang and evo (but it’s a far cry from Harry Potter style fairy tales). Believing that sticks instantly turn into snakes (just like in Harry Potter) is insulting your own intellegence. I’m not anti theist but I refuse to believe in this Harry Potter type nonsence. I have my beliefs but I don’t totally and utterly deny science.

  15. Justwantahover says:

    Science is based on evidence, religion is based on dogma that you have to believe (even if you can’t) otherwise you will go to Hell! The Bible is full of scare tactics and ultimatums to force the followers to obey and believe what they are told (no matter how unbelievable it is). If miracles were true, science would not be. But I’m putting my trust in science cos you are not forced to believe that sticks can instantly turn into snakes. Do you expect me to believe that?

  16. Justwantahover says:

    You are putting your trust in talking snakes, sticks that turn into snakes and swallowing other snakes that were once sticks. I’ll put my trust in ameobas that (very slowly) turn into us!

  17. jesusfilledphil says:

    I just looked at your channel and see that you like dabbling in speaker design – Me too, I have been authorised service center to Roland Musical instruments for over 24 years electronics and sound is my forte. I am now authorised by just about every major manufacturer going. I am a player of drums and also of bass and love music including pop jazz. I am just getting into re coning speakers, if your one point designs give the best fidelity, I may try myself. Strange you are not using a valve amp.

  18. jesusfilledphil says:

    I can see that you could probably wipe the floor with me scientifically speaking so I will bow out now before you start insulting my intelligence which lies in areas that you do not understand and refuse to embrace.

  19. jesusfilledphil says:

    You sound very much like Richard Dawkins here, I detect a note of ridicule! Of course to someone who doesn’t see the supernatural and only looks at the natural, the claims of the Bible would seem idiotic. But that doesn’t mean that you are right to rubbish the book that is the reference point for not only my life but that of my family.

  20. jesusfilledphil says:

    You need to investigate the supernatural realm, not all things are physical in this world and until you realise this you will be in the dark.I am of sound mind and I have seen miracles and the supernatural clearly at work. You need to realise that there is evil in the world and an agenda of deception that has swallowed you up. Science cant explain how stone henge or the pyramids were built, it can’t explain how a bee can fly. It cannot build the simplest of cells, much of science is theory.

  21. jesusfilledphil says:

    Forgive me, but I haven’t got the time to reply to all of your many posts. It is clear that we have different beliefs. You need to be mindful that you are putting all your trust in human scientists who are often wrong or changing their views based on new understandings. My God of the Bible does not conflict with science or biology and seems to be the more plausible answer at times to many. The video I watched about the old vs new earth had two Christians in it – Some Christians support Old earth

  22. Justwantahover says:

    Creationists love “blind science”. Let’s both go to uni for ten yrs and look throught their microscopes, and then argue. Argue about something we can see, like the stars. Even if God did “stretch it out” the stars would glow for the first instant, but as God stretchs it (much faster than the speed of light) the stars would “disappear” and the furtherest Galaxies won”t be seen for anothe 12 billion yrs. Are you familiar wit “Russel Humphries”. Their are 13 methods for measureing speed of light.

  23. Justwantahover says:

    The moon thing that creationist do is bullshit! I calculated it from information from mainstream sites and it checks out fine for 4.6 billion yrs. Your yec site data is up-to-shit (liars).
    As far as the second q, I’ll look it up. Sounds like pathetic lies to me. Look up “giant skeletons” on you tube, then look up “captured aliens” and see witch one you believe. Will I believe in your pathetic fossilised cowboy boot (of witch you won’t let us test it). More creationist lies.

  24. Justwantahover says:

    The reason it could go on fo weeks is because I’m every bit as certain as you. I’m every bit as certain on the scientific answer on how we got here as you are with your talking snakes and sticks that turn into snakes and eat other snakes that were once sticks.

  25. Justwantahover says:

    Speaking science: A combination of the Biblical miracles and science (creation science) is not science because the Biblical miracles aren’t science (even if they were true). It would be the “unknown”. The big bang is virtually the “unknown”. And big bang science is still not really science (not until it’s known). But that is just an instant that is unknown (like creation). But from then-on, it becomes more known, and that is by evidence alone. I can give you evidence (lists a foot deep).

  26. gabriel. sebastian huallpa gutiérrez says:

    fuck 0:00 to 2:24 i just came here for chrissy fuck

  27. S King says:

    Omg jealous of jason…so many pretty girl friends! Everyone one them are amazing!

  28. TheEl750 says:

    I was going to do the same, but my reaction time is a bit slow. And realised Tiffany was here, so, now writing this. Then left after Tiffany stopped.

  29. DaKoTa NoEl says:

    Who would date someone from youtube. just saying. ??

  30. blake scott says:

    “all comes down to”
    bitches being addicted to blogging there every thought.
    kthanxbai

  31. Fern Yonradee says:

    ตาเหล่

  32. ViolentFinesse says:

    put chrissy on thumbnail to get more viewers? well played, well played

  33. Edmark James Haboc says:

    How the hell did you asked Chrissy to make video for this?

  34. anonymous2high says:

    4shared.com/file/FUEXJyyv/NICKI_MANAJ_FRENCH_KISSES_JUST.html CRAZY SHIII I WOULD TAP THAT ASS IF I WAS JUSTIN>….hahaha

  35. anonymous2high says:

    4shared.com/file/FUEXJyyv/NICKI_MANAJ_FRENCH_KISSES_JUST. html  CRAZY SHIII I WOULD TAP THAT ASS IF I WAS JUSTIN>….hahaha

  36. sunako swift says:

    all i want 2:26 marry me

  37. Alejandrorivero93 says:

    I will do whatever it takes to date chrissy

  38. gigitylol6969 says:

    tiffanyyyyyyyy <33333333

  39. Richardfan01 says:

    Smart to make Chrissy the thumbnail.

  40. Scarlett Wood says:

    Who else knew that Megan Nicole and Crissy were gonna be in this?

  41. Patrick Haze says:

    whats the intro song at the start of the video?????

  42. Ansteeg says:

    oi…you girls…screw the relationship and make me more music goddammit…

  43. LoneBluesman says:

    2:24 <--

  44. Jay Xiong says:

    I came for Arden Cho

  45. fien2706 says:

    i didn’t really come because of Chrissy but i subconsciously stopped the video after Chrissy’s part :/

  46. givemther4py says:

    ahhh chrissy <3

  47. MindBreakersTV says:

    Chrissy <3

  48. aiman rohisham says:

    TRUST ISSUUUUES

  49. Flashpaqtks says:

    manuscripts significantly

  50. Beateruwu says:

    book about the chess of love “, created by

  51. BlackVueetu says:

    manuscripts attributed to Robins

  52. Rubberpvd says:

    from lat. manus – “hand” and scribo – “I write”) ]

  53. Blendermrb says:

    from lat. manus – “hand” and scribo – “I write”) [1]

Leave a Reply