TJT pelkää, valehtelee eikä uskalla vastata kysymyksiin
Saimme taas esimerkin TJT:n ja muiden kretiinien tyylistä.
Heitetään suoria valheita ja paetaan niihin vastaamatta.
Tässä muistin virkistyksesi yksi viesti, johon TJT ei uskaltanut mitenkään vastata, vaan aloitti uusien valheiden tulvan.
Et siis kyennyt kommentoimaan tätä Diaboliksen viestiä, vaan väänsi solvaamiseen tapasi mukaan. M.O.T
Lisää luettavaa. TheologyWebissä kirjoitteleva Kirk Bertsche, fyysikko ja työskennellyt radiohiili AMS laboratoriossa, on tuottanut tällaista:
The expert who prepared and measured the RATE samples is convinced that the RATE coal samples were contaminated in situ. Coal is “notorious” for contamination, due to uranium which is often in or near the coal (especially a problem for N. Australian coals), from humic acids which are almost always present, and from microbial growth. The best coal dates reportedly come from anthracites with glassy surfaces, which have given dates as old as 70k years, or about 0.02 pMC.
It is also possible that the coal samples were contaminated while in storage for an indeterminate time in a DOE geology lab refrigerator (1). Geology labs often have elevated levels of radiocarbon due to tracer studies, neutron activation studies, and dust from uranium-bearing rocks. Carbon is highly mobile and contamination can spread through an entire lab and persist for decades (4). (I have seen a badly contaminated sample which was traced to storage in a geology lab refrigerator.)
The diamond samples were difficult to graphitize, and apparently required some modifications to the normal procedure (1). This likely increased the contamination. In addition, the samples themselves were reportedly pitted and appeared to have been subjected to previous analyses of some sort. Nevertheless, the 5 deep-mine diamond samples were only slightly above background levels (0.01 to 0.07 pMC after background subtraction), while the 7 alluvial samples ranged from 0.03 to 0.31 pMC after background subtraction. Subsequently, this lab has inserted diamond directly into an ion source, eliminating the graphitization process, and has measured much older dates (unpublished). Taylor and Southon have measured 0.005 to 0.03 pMC by the same technique, which they interpret as their instrument background (2). This gives strong evidence that the RATE diamond samples were contaminated, either by previous testing or by graphitization.
Thus it is clear that the previous peer-reviewed radiocarbon AMS measurements can be explained by contamination, mostly in the graphitization process. The recent RATE coal samples were probably contaminated in situ, and the diamond samples were either contaminated in the graphitization process or by previous analyses. In any case, other coal and diamond samples have been measured at essentially the instrument background levels, giving no evidence for intrinsic radiocarbon. RATE’s claim that all carbonaceous material contains intrinsic radiocarbon is not supported by the data.
Näitä asiallisia ja vastaamattomia viestejä on palsta tulvillaan eli TJT on todella Täysin Järjetön Tulvija