There’s something wrong with dinosaur remnants. They might be only 40,000 years old.

These top creationist arguments challenge the geological timescale.  Top creationist arguments indeed.
Dinosaur bones Carbon-14 dated to less than 40,000 
Carbon dated dinosaur bones (well-preserved dinosaur fossils); the radiocarbon tests
Researchers have found a reason for the puzzling survival of soft tissue and 
collagen in dinosaur bones – the bones are younger than anyone ever guessed.  
Carbon-14 (C-14) dating of multiple samples of bone from 8 dinosaurs from 
Texas, Alaska, Colorado, and Montana revealed that they are only 22,000 to 
39,000 years old.  Since dinosaurs are thought to be over 65 million years old, 
the news is stunning.  And more than some can tolerate.  After the AOGS-AGU 
conference in Singapore, the abstract was removed from the conference website by two chairmen because they could not accept the findings. Unwilling to challenge the 
data openly, they erased the report from public view without a word to the 
authors or even to the AOGS officers, until after an investigation. It won’t be 
The researchers presented their findings at the 2012 Western Pacific Geophysics 
Meeting in Singapore, August 13-17, a conference of the American Geophysical 
Union (AGU) and the Asia Oceania Geosciences Society (AOGS).

Carbon-14 is considered to be unassailable in its reliability among dating 
methods.  It’s accuracy as a technique has been verified by using C-14 to date 
artifacts whose age is known historically.  The possibility that the amount of C-14 in the air has fluctuated adds a small uncertainty.  But the greater possibility for error is 
that the amount of C-14 in bone samples has been altered by contaminants such as decayed organic matter from soils.

Dr. Thomas Seiler, a physicist from Germany, gave the presentation in Singapore.  He says that his team and the laboratories they employed took special care to avoid 
contamination. That included protecting the samples, avoiding cracked areas in 
the bones, and meticulous pre-cleaning of the samples with chemicals to remove possible contaminants.  Knowing that small concentrations of collagen can attract 
contamination, they compared precision Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) 
tests of collagen and bioapatite (hard carbonate bone mineral) with conventional 
counting methods of large bone fragments from the same dinosaurs.  
“Comparing such entirely different molecules as minerals and organics from the 
same bone region, we obtained concordant C-14 signals which were well below 
the upper limits of C-14 dating.  These, together with many other remarkable 
signal concordances between samples from different fossils, geographic regions 
and stratigraphic positions make random contamination as origin of the C-14 
signals unlikely”, he notes.  “If dinosaur bones are 65 million years old, there 
should not be one atom of C-14 left in them.”

Many dinosaur bones are not fossilized.  Dr. Mary Schweitzer, associate 
professor of marine, earth, and atmospheric sciences at North Carolina State 
University, surprised scientists in 2005 when she reported finding soft tissue in 
dinosaur bones.  She started a firestorm of controversy in 2007 and 2008 when 
she reported that she had sequenced proteins in the dinosaur bone.  Critics 
charged that the findings were mistaken or that what she called soft tissue was 
really biofilm produced by bacteria that had entered from outside the bone.  
Schweitzer answered the challenge by testing with antibodies.  Her report in 
2009 confirmed the presence of collagen and other proteins that bacteria do 
not  make. Also in 2009, the team of Dr. Phil Wilby discovered a fossilized squid 
that contained a sac of ink so well-preserved that it could be used in a pen for 
writing, found in rock that is considered to be 150 million years old.  

In 2011, a Swedish team found soft tissue and biomolecules in the bones of 
creature from the time of the dinosaurs, a Mosasaur, which was a giant lizard 
that swam in shallow ocean waters.  Schweitzer herself wonders why these 
materials are preserved when all the models say they should be degraded.  
That is, if they are over 65 million years old as the conventional wisdom says.
The theoretical limit for C-14 dating is 100,000 years before present using AMS.  
For practical purposes, it is 50,000 to 60,000 years.  Dinosaur bones with 
Carbon-14 dates in the range of 22,000 to 39,000 years before present, 
combined with the discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur bones, indicate that 
something is wrong with the conventional wisdom about dinosaurs.

Dear Tap,

Researchers presented their findings at the 2012 Western Pacific Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 13-17, a conference of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and the Asia Oceania Geosciences Society (AOGS).
Best –

Steve Gibbs


The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.

4 Responses to “There’s something wrong with dinosaur remnants. They might be only 40,000 years old.”

  1. Anonymous says:

    They’re all dead, does it really matter how long since they were killed off?

  2. Tapestry says:

    This could be something to do with why we don’t know anything about the reptilian figures in Egyptian hieroglyphics, and why reptilian images are universal in the ancient world, going back to the very start.

    There is a lot we don’t know. This could be a big clue, if true.

  3. And most still believe that places like the pyramids at giza and puma punku were built using copper chisels and stone hammers, anybody with any engineering background can clearly see that these structure’s would need heavy machinery, and very advanced mathematics,
    Egyptian statues were the faces have perfect symmetry.
    Then there are all the correlation’s between the oral myths from different sides of the planet all telling the same story of hybrid beings teaching civilisation.
    And so we come to all the reptiles in most of the oldest records that we have, all very strange….

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.