Young earth creationism & 40000 year old frozen wolf

mcarans

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 10, 2018
539
226
47
Wellington
✟136,444.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Case in point - Paracetamol - probably the most used pill - they don't know exactly how it works!
Thanks to scientific studies, you can know that regardless of how it works, it is highly likely to be effective at pain relief. Without scientific studies, it's unlikely you'd have ever heard of it. Without scientific studies in fact, you wouldn't have any of the conveniences of life that you take for granted.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Darkhorse
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Carbon dating is a dating technique predicated upon three things:

  • The rate at which the unstable radioactive C-14 isotope decays into the stable non-radioactive N-14 isotope,
  • The ratio of C-12 to C-14 found in a given specimen,
  • And the ratio C-12 to C-14 found in the atmosphere at the time of the specimen's death.
Carbon dating is controversial for a couple of reasons. First of all, it's predicated upon a set of questionable assumptions. We have to assume, for example, that the rate of decay (that is, a 5,730 year half-life) has remained constant throughout the unobservable past. However, there is strong evidence which suggests that radioactive decay may have been greatly accelerated in the unobservable past.1 We must also assume that the ratio of C-12 to C-14 in the atmosphere has remained constant throughout the unobservable past (so we can know what the ratio was at the time of the specimen's death). And yet we know that "radiocarbon is forming 28-37% faster than it is decaying,"2 which means it hasn't yet reached equilibrium, which means the ratio is higher today than it was in the unobservable past. We also know that the ratio decreased during the industrial revolution due to the dramatic increase of CO2 produced by factories. This man-made fluctuation wasn't a natural occurrence, but it demonstrates the fact that fluctuation is possible and that a period of natural upheaval upon the earth could greatly affect the ratio. Volcanoes spew out CO2 which could just as effectively decrease the ratio. Specimens which lived and died during a period of intense volcanism would appear older than they really are if they were dated using this technique. The ratio can further be affected by C-14 production rates in the atmosphere, which in turn is affected by the amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth's atmosphere. The amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth's atmosphere is itself affected by things like the earth's magnetic field which deflects cosmic rays. Precise measurements taken over the last 140 years have shown a steady decay in the strength of the earth's magnetic field. This means there's been a steady increase in radiocarbon production (which would increase the ratio).

And finally, this dating scheme is controversial because the dates derived are often wildly inconsistent. For example, "One part of Dima [a famous baby mammoth discovered in 1977] was 40,000 RCY [Radiocarbon Years], another was 26,000 RCY, and 'wood found immediately around the carcass' was 9,000-10,000 RCY." (Walt Brown, In the Beginning, 2001, p. 176)
Carbon Dating


Absolutely no one knows what conditions were like back to the time of creation---it didn't even rain until the flood. And then afterwards, they still don't know what the conditions were. In a nutshell---carbon dating is only accurate to the known conditions which still means only about 6-10,000 years.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Young earth creationism says the world is in the order of 10000 years old. How does it account for a 40000 year old wolf's head?
We shake our heads and quote Ronald Reagan, "There you go again."
How do we account for a 40,000 year old wolf?
How do we explain a 4.54 billion year old planet and a 13.85 billion year old universe?
How do we explain the supernatural to people who blindly claim it doesn't exist?

Simple. God's right. You're wrong. We have faith in the Lord who created the heavens and the earth in six days, who created man from dust on the sixth day and who rested on the seventh day. We expect that those who champion against God's word will have more convincing arguments over time until they have lead many away from grace. We understand that our struggle is against principalities, not individuals. Nothing we say will change what you believe. Nothing you say will change the truth of God's word.
 
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
"The severed head of a wolf that died about 40,000 years ago has been found in Siberia, and because of the freezing conditions, the remains are so well preserved that the fur, teeth, brain and facial tissue are largely intact.

Pavel Yefimov, a local resident, discovered the head last summer on the banks of the Tirekhtyakh river close to the Arctic Circle in the region of Yakutia, according to the Siberian Times.

3500.jpg


The head was handed to the Science Academy of Yakutia. Researchers there sent samples and measurement data abroad and with help from colleagues in Japan and Sweden determined its age as approximately 40,000 years, the news outlet said.

Footage provided to Reuters TV by the academy shows the head of an animal, visibly bigger than that of a modern wolf, covered with fur and with teeth visible. Its eyes are missing."

Young earth creationism says the world is in the order of 10000 years old. How does it account for a 40000 year old wolf's head?

Frozen wolf's head found in Siberia is 40,000 years old
Somehow I think people are missing the boat here in terms of Scientific discovery.

Shouldn't we have fridges that efficient by now?
 
Upvote 0

Danielwright2311

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 28, 2018
2,219
1,358
50
Sacorro NM
✟110,365.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Divorced
"The severed head of a wolf that died about 40,000 years ago has been found in Siberia, and because of the freezing conditions, the remains are so well preserved that the fur, teeth, brain and facial tissue are largely intact.

Pavel Yefimov, a local resident, discovered the head last summer on the banks of the Tirekhtyakh river close to the Arctic Circle in the region of Yakutia, according to the Siberian Times.

3500.jpg


The head was handed to the Science Academy of Yakutia. Researchers there sent samples and measurement data abroad and with help from colleagues in Japan and Sweden determined its age as approximately 40,000 years, the news outlet said.

Footage provided to Reuters TV by the academy shows the head of an animal, visibly bigger than that of a modern wolf, covered with fur and with teeth visible. Its eyes are missing."

Young earth creationism says the world is in the order of 10000 years old. How does it account for a 40000 year old wolf's head?

Frozen wolf's head found in Siberia is 40,000 years old

So I should go and dig up a new grave of a dog and claim it also as also 7000 years old and see what happens.

I do not believe it s a 4000 year old head at all and i laugh at the notion.
 
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
"The severed head of a wolf that died about 40,000 years ago has been found in Siberia, and because of the freezing conditions, the remains are so well preserved that the fur, teeth, brain and facial tissue are largely intact.

Pavel Yefimov, a local resident, discovered the head last summer on the banks of the Tirekhtyakh river close to the Arctic Circle in the region of Yakutia, according to the Siberian Times.

3500.jpg


The head was handed to the Science Academy of Yakutia. Researchers there sent samples and measurement data abroad and with help from colleagues in Japan and Sweden determined its age as approximately 40,000 years, the news outlet said.

Footage provided to Reuters TV by the academy shows the head of an animal, visibly bigger than that of a modern wolf, covered with fur and with teeth visible. Its eyes are missing."

Young earth creationism says the world is in the order of 10000 years old. How does it account for a 40000 year old wolf's head?

Frozen wolf's head found in Siberia is 40,000 years old
 
Upvote 0

sparow

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,540
426
85
✟481,862.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Scientists make an estimate within a range. They might say for example 38000 to 42000 years of even 30000 to 50000 years. The point is even if the margin of error were 50%, the wolf's head would still be older than 10000 years.


There is a case where a tooth was removed from a living musk rat and carbon dated as 300 years old. If the margin of error was 99% then the wolf head could be between 4,000 years and 4,000,000 years.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
"The severed head of a wolf that died about 40,000 years ago has been found in Siberia, and because of the freezing conditions, the remains are so well preserved that the fur, teeth, brain and facial tissue are largely intact.

Pavel Yefimov, a local resident, discovered the head last summer on the banks of the Tirekhtyakh river close to the Arctic Circle in the region of Yakutia, according to the Siberian Times.

3500.jpg


The head was handed to the Science Academy of Yakutia. Researchers there sent samples and measurement data abroad and with help from colleagues in Japan and Sweden determined its age as approximately 40,000 years, the news outlet said.

Footage provided to Reuters TV by the academy shows the head of an animal, visibly bigger than that of a modern wolf, covered with fur and with teeth visible. Its eyes are missing."

Young earth creationism says the world is in the order of 10000 years old. How does it account for a 40000 year old wolf's head?

Frozen wolf's head found in Siberia is 40,000 years old



The conventional methods by which these alleged dates are assigned to these types of discoveries are untrustworthy because they are based on three basic assumptions that cannot be confirmed. The assumptions upon which they are based are:



1. Constant rate of decay.

2. No presence of daughter product alongside parent product.

(What is meant by parent and daughter product is one element produced from another. For example, C-14 from C-12 or Lead from Uranium. C-12 is a parent product and C-14 is the daughter product of C-12. Uranium is a parent product and lead is the daughter product of Uranium)

3. Closed system which is based on the assumption that the sample being dated was not contaminated by any external elements.



With organic material, which would include this wolf’s head, the rate of decay can slow or accelerate under certain conditions which makes C-14 dating under which this wolf’s head would have undergone unreliable.

Because the wolf’s head that was discovered was found under conditions that have kept it fairly intact and preserved, the rate of decay would have been very slow in comparison to other conditions which would have accelerated the rate of decay.

All that C-14 dating can really tell anyone for is the ratio of C-12 to C-14, but it can never really tell you how old something is because, again, the assumptions upon which the entire dating premise is founded cannot be confirmed. The same goes for radiometric dating as well.

For more information on why young earth creationists do not trust radiometric or carbon dating results, and not just from a theological perspective but even from a scientific perspective, visit the following:



The Institute For Creation Research (ICR) at https://www.icr.org
or Creation Ministries International at https://creation.com


Answers In Genesis and Creationwiki may also have information on why conventional dating methods cannot be trusted as well:


Answers In Genesis can be found at https://answersingenesis.org
and Creationwiki can be found at https://creationwiki.org



Creationism.org has list of other young earth creationist ministries that might also have some helpful information as well.
 
Upvote 0

mcarans

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 10, 2018
539
226
47
Wellington
✟136,444.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The conventional methods by which these alleged dates are assigned to these types of discoveries are untrustworthy because they are based on three basic assumptions that cannot be confirmed. The assumptions upon which they are based are:



1. Constant rate of decay.

2. No presence of daughter product alongside parent product.

(What is meant by parent and daughter product is one element produced from another. For example, C-14 from C-12 or Lead from Uranium. C-12 is a parent product and C-14 is the daughter product of C-12. Uranium is a parent product and lead is the daughter product of Uranium)

3. Closed system which is based on the assumption that the sample being dated was not contaminated by any external elements.



With organic material, which would include this wolf’s head, the rate of decay can slow or accelerate under certain conditions which makes C-14 dating under which this wolf’s head would have undergone unreliable.

Because the wolf’s head that was discovered was found under conditions that have kept it fairly intact and preserved, the rate of decay would have been very slow in comparison to other conditions which would have accelerated the rate of decay.

All that C-14 dating can really tell anyone for is the ratio of C-12 to C-14, but it can never really tell you how old something is because, again, the assumptions upon which the entire dating premise is founded cannot be confirmed. The same goes for radiometric dating as well.

For more information on why young earth creationists do not trust radiometric or carbon dating results, and not just from a theological perspective but even from a scientific perspective, visit the following:



The Institute For Creation Research (ICR) at https://www.icr.org
or Creation Ministries International at https://creation.com


Answers In Genesis and Creationwiki may also have information on why conventional dating methods cannot be trusted as well:


Answers In Genesis can be found at https://answersingenesis.org
and Creationwiki can be found at https://creationwiki.org



Creationism.org has list of other young earth creationist ministries that might also have some helpful information as well.
I'm interested in any papers in peer reviewed scientific journals.
 
Upvote 0

Contenders Edge

Well-Known Member
Supporter
May 13, 2019
2,615
370
43
Hayfork
✟167,447.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm interested in any papers in peer reviewed scientific journals.

The sources provided for you may very well take you to what you are looking for if you will take the time to examine them.
 
Upvote 0

trophy33

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
8,837
3,550
N/A
✟145,210.00
Country
Czech Republic
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There is a case where a tooth was removed from a living musk rat and carbon dated as 300 years old.
Radiocarbon dating cannot be used for living organisms:

"Occasions for potential errors in dating:
a) while the organism is still alive..[because of, for example], reservoir effects transferred via food chains"

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03014223.2000.9517630


A good laboratory must know this and do whatever is technically possible to avoid such errors.

If the margin of error was 99% then the wolf head could be between 4,000 years and 4,000,000 years.

Also, your mathematics is not very good, you cannot take margin from hundreds of years by percentage and use it as a general one. 300 years error in 4.7 billion years possibility is 0% margin, not 99%.
If the tooth was dated to be from the era of dinosaurs, you could have some point, but not like this.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mcarans

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 10, 2018
539
226
47
Wellington
✟136,444.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

trophy33

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
8,837
3,550
N/A
✟145,210.00
Country
Czech Republic
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I had a look at one of them and they give reasons why they don't get published in peer reviewed scientific journals Do Creation Scientists Publish in Mainstream Journals?
Which is quite funny, because ICR complains about a supposed bias from "anti-bible editors", while they whole existence is based on a specific biblical reading and is therefore biased as much as possible.
Why the ICR does not publish studies proving evolution and long age?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mcarans

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 10, 2018
539
226
47
Wellington
✟136,444.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Which is quite funny, because ICR complains about a supposed bias from "anti-bible editors", while they whole existence is based on a specific biblical reading and is therefore biased as much as possible.
Why the ICR does not publish studies proving evolution and long age?
Well it would be funny if it weren't so damaging to our witness as Christians.

In theory views on creationism are not important to practicing faith but in practice it damages the church’s witness because many who have this viewpoint attack science and scientists. That might be fine if the holders of such views completely eschewed the products of science like medicine, cars etc. But to say science is flawed while relying on it to live comfortably leaves people with that view open to accusations of hypocricy which is damaging to the church’s witness.
 
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well it would be funny if it weren't so damaging to our witness as Christians.
Please explain how proclaiming the word of God is damaging to our witness.
In theory views on creationism are not important to practicing faith but in practice it damages the church’s witness because many who have this viewpoint attack science and scientists.
There is no theory of creationism. There is the word of God and the word of man. You choose.
The word of God is clear; God created the heavens and the earth in six days and rested on the seventh. Christ affirmed the great flood as a real event. Those who deny these things deny the word of God. It's that simple.
God is not slave to the physical laws of the world He created. He can and has frozen time for a day and has set back the rotation of the earth without consequence. He has raised the dead. The Bible lists 333 miracles, each of which contradicts the laws of science. How does one follow Christ and deny His teachings? Nothing in the Bible supports evolution or an old earth.
What damages our witness is people proclaiming their faith and then attacking every aspect of it.

That might be fine if the holders of such views completely eschewed the products of science like medicine, cars etc.
That remains the poorest excuse for an argument ever, and yet I see it all the time from those who disbelieve God's word.
But to say science is flawed while relying on it to live comfortably leaves people with that view open to accusations of hypocricy which is damaging to the church’s witness.
The problem is that you don't understand what science is.
Science is the study of the physical world around us. It uses processes which are testable and repeatable. It cannot account for the origination of anything, nor can it account for the supernatural. To believe only in the physical world is to deny half of reality and all of eternity. To put it plainly, how does one proclaim the existence of a supernatural God while denying that the supernatural exists?

I'll make it easy. Please list for me which of the 333 miracles you believe happened and explain how the laws of physics allowed them.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums