Why do people still think coal is ancient?
Those that think coal is millions of years ago have some hard questions to answer. All coal deposits contain carbon 14. This puts an absolute upper age limit of about 50k years. The popular idea that coal formed from swamps is not supported by the evidence. There are many examples of polystrate fossils extending through ‘millions of years’ of rocks. http://www.googlesyndicatedsearch.com/u/creationontheweb?q=polystrate&hl=en&lr=
The best explanation for the observed coal beds is that a lot of trees and organic matter was buried quickly in a catastrophic flood – and recently at that.
Do those that resist facing up to this have a religious agenda which clouds their science?
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3007
Related Blogs
- CBM Development and Associated Coal Blocks in India | Free Articles Directory | Submit Articles
- Q&A: Is carbon-14 dating accurate? (read the whole article or dont answer)?Hot Product Review | Hot Product Review
Tagged with: amp • carbon 14 • catastrophic flood • coal beds • coal deposits • content view • creationontheweb • hl en • organic matter • polystrate fossils • religious agenda • rocks • science • swamps • trees • upper age limit
Filed under: Mattresses
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
"The greatest coal-forming time in geologic history was during the Carboniferous era (280 to 345 million years ago). Further large deposits of coal are found in the Permian, with lesser but still significant Triassic and Jurassic deposits, and minor Cretaceous and younger deposits of lignite."
Honestly age dating and knowing the process itself takes a very long time doesn’t leave much question in my mind that coal took millions of years to form. Carbon dating doesn’t work on coal for the most part unless it was laid after the Cretaceous. You have to use Uranium/Thorium dating to get an accurate age on coal beds. And no I don’t have a religious agenda. I just look at real facts and not bunk made up to fit a hypothesis they want to make work. Honestly as a Christian these Creationist Scientists do very, very, shoddy work.
Does it really matter?
At some point it will run out, no matter what time in history it was formed. It may not be in our lifetime, but it will run out nonetheless without alternative fuel sources. Maybe you should spend your science efforts researching for the future.
…And a religious prayer wouldn’t hurt either.
the flood in noahs time
I am sorry but these creationist websites are the biggest load of codswallop on the internet.The talk origins website has a very interesting article ( see the link below) which shoots the idea of ‘young’ coal down in flames.
"Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof."
Good science uses an open mind and looks at all sides. To promote one theory to the exclusion of any other evidence or theories is considered extremely bad science.
You can find sites on the web and extremes of view all over the place to support your own pet theories.
Gues you are not a scientist at all!
This is the most unmitigated BS.
C14 in fossil fuels varies greatly, mostly really low levels that at the very least place the formation of the coal long before the unequivocal 4004BC creationist date for the start of our world. If you know anything about chemistry you ought to know that C14 is formed constantly from radiation. In the atmosphere it’s formed from radiation from space, and in buried geological formations it’s formed from radiation from included and neighboring radioactive elements in the rocks. This in no way means that the coal is young.
The world is old, really old, many 100s of millions of years old. Get over it!
There was no Noah’s flood. Noah is a myth. Get over it!
probably the same reason you think god exists.
Dating the coal deposits does not rely on carbon 14 dating. You take information from the depsoitional history of the strata above and below the coal seams and consider the fossils as a dating tool. any attempt to disregard the information contained in rocks and fossils is an attempt to promote a religious agenda.
The maximum age that radiocarbon dating can reliably measure is not much more than 50,000 years. This is because the amount of C14 remaining after 50,000 years is about the same as the trace amounts of C14 being produced in situ by contamination, e.g. from the natural radioactivity of surrounding rocks, or the action of living micro-organisms, or new carbonate deposited in fractures by groundwater, or other causes. So, it’s entirely to be expected that radiocarbon dating would show a maximum age of around 50,000 years *regardless* of how old the coal is – even if it’s actually half a billion years old!
The way to date older coal is to use radiometric dating (not based on C14) to determine the age of overlying igneous rocks, which can show that the coal must be millions of years old. We know that radiometric dating is accurate because the dates determined by multiple and completely independent dating techniques (radiometric and other) all agree with each other.
Hence your young coal hypothesis must be rejected.
It is unfortunate the formation of coal which has pretty weak theories on its formation is subject to even weaker theories. Coal is formed in two ways in my opinion. One is from the accumulation of vegetable matter and this forms low grade peat and lignite. The higher grade coals are formed by methane permeating from deep within the earth and depositing preferentially in certain places. Once the carbon begins to deposit it preferentially deposits in this area. In this way, methane forms deposits of coal that may be very thick. This is also why methane is almost always by coal. It is also why coal is almost diagnostic of gas fields. Funny thing is most geologists outside of Russia would disagree with me and say that it formed mostly from vegetation in old swamps. The actually formation of coal supports the theory that the earth accreted from smaller comets and asteroids some of which contained hydrocarbons and did not melt completely. It does not support any myths of catastrophic floods.
Backwards logic- the upper limit of dating C14 is 50,000 yrs, but we don’t want to date C14, we want to date coal! The law of superposition and correlation by fossil evidence support the ancient nature of coal.
How did C14 get there? Coal is very permeable and groundwater moving thru the bed deposits C14- it is a contaminate not a component of the coal.
If there was one catastrophic flood then why are there so many distinct coal seams separated by meters and meters of sediments? (More than 1 Noah???)
I think YOUR religious agenda is clouding YOUR science.
How much does creationontheweb.com pay you to spread their propaganda? Whatever it is, it’s not enough.