Direct dating of fossils badoo dating girls argentina mendoza
The process generally used to date a fossil is circuitous and subject to differing interpretations.
The paper used one of the same excuses that have been used so many times when radiodated "ages" of given samples fail to line up with the accepted dates—that something tampered with the bone and thus skewed the results.
And when enough of them disagree, either with each other, with older dating results, or with the "ages" set forth in geology manuals, then this new "direct dating" of bone will fade out and another method will no doubt take its place. Instead of relying on a "broken" radiodating clock, researchers would be better advised to interpret the geologic record using the framework of biblical history—which matches the evidence indicating that the majority of sedimentary layers, and the fossils they contain, resulted from a global deluge just thousands of years ago.
But what can assure readers that the particular test results chosen by the authors as acceptable were not themselves the result of tampering?
Likewise, what is to stop this new dating technique from repeating the history of past radiodating methods? When more results are published, there will be enough "ages" to compare.