News you won't see in controlled mainstream media.

Thank you SoSick for your contribution.

The problem for you is that I am not using carbon dating.

Whether the rate of decay has (miraculously) changed in the past, or whether there were concentrations that were 3x's todays concentration is irrelevant to the central point:

• Items that grew at the same time, using the atmosphere as a source of carbon, will have the same proportion of C14/C12.
  or
• Items that grew at the same time, using the atmosphere as a source of carbon, cannot have different proportions of C14/C12.

It's that simple.

Thus when I count to 10,000 years ago in one set of tree rings, or lake varves or whatever, and test a sample in that layer for the ratio of C14/C12, and compare that to a similar sample from another set of annual layers where I count up to 10,000 years ago, they will either be the same ratio of C14/C12 or at least one of the two time scales is wrong. So far -- in all this data -- such a state of discord has not occurred.

Instead, time and again the ratios are the same, year after year, layer after layer.

[qs]I saw a show on the weather channel or someplace just last week for instance that claims there was 4 times as much CO2 in the atmosphere when the earth was young compared to today, for instance.[/qs]Gosh, now there's a certified source of scientific information!

The sad (for you) fact is that the level of CO2 increasing or decreasing has little impact on the proportion of C14 to C12, as both of them combine with oxygen to form Carbon Dioxide. Having 4x's the amount of C12 and 4x's the amount of C14 does not change the ratio of C14/C12.

Yet the fact that the earth is very old does not happen to be one of them.

Enjoy.
[color:"green"]
Note: my time is limited, so I only choose threads of particular interest to me and I cannot guarantee a reply to all responses (particularly if they do not discuss the issue/s), and I expect other people to do the same. Thank you for your consideration.[/color]