Internet Blogger and Death Metal Band Collapse - Halifax, Canada.
Death Metal Record Label Forward Regression Records and the Author of Space Command Book Script
www.advanceddungeonsanddragons.com - Fan Page |
Friday, November 29, 2019
Why Plate Tectonics Shows Carbon Dating Is Wrong
Plate Tectonics Proves Carbon Dating Wrong
This is an explanation on why carbon dating may not be correct in science, the answer is because of plate tectonics.
Plate Tectonics or Continental Drift is the planets process of moving the land around, sometimes entire continents are on the ocean floor and then resurface later.
This is a fact that there have been past formations of the planets continents like on Pangaea when the world was one continent.
In fact this has happened an infinite amount of times to humans, this is a short example of how Plate Tectonics proves Carbon dating wrong.
The reason...the ground uncovered in the continents has been smashed and mixed by the planet an uncountable amount of times...meaning the rock formations that are hard today have been "sifted" by the planet and contain rocks from all previous land formations.
When they date a core sample, that is "linear test" of the samples in the dirt to determine age...however the land has been sifted, meaning that the samples contain dirt from other past land formations that are unaccounted for by carbon dating.
Carbon dating pinpoints a fossil in the land record with a match on the plate tectonics data sheet to compare the age of the fossil with a specific known land formation in the fossil record.
However, the land has been sifted or smashed from plate tectonics making the fossil record unreadable, when they find a land sample to compare to the fossil the land sample is a "block" with a similar matching pattern.
They are saying that this is a "fixed block" of the planets continent with a date on it by it's compounds.
However, the fossil match is only one sample in the "block" found of the planets crust. This block also contains many other samples of older rock because the ground has been sifted by the planet.
I mean they are only matching the fossil to 1 in 100 million other samples found in the same chuck of rock, these other samples are not part of the fossil in the record and may be way older that the matching fossil sample.
Like you are getting dirt in a bucket of samples from all past land formations that is sifted by the Earth meaning that the rock is not dateable anyway, there are too many past rock formations that have been sifted to determine an actual date making the Earth way older to even be able to count it.
When they find a fossil sample they only match it to 1 of the dirt particles in the bucket of 100 million, then they throw the rest of the data out.
The rest of the data is the mixed rock of the Earth from all past land formations making the dirt unreadable.
They are only matching a trace element in the rock sample to match the fossil to a specific known land formation from the "bucket samples".
The other dirt in the bucket is made up of too much sifted dirt from the planet to be able to actually date the record because it is not "one core sample" that they have discovered.
The core sample has been sifted, which is unaccounted for in Plate Tectonics / Carbon Dating.