Archeologists use counts of the radioactive isotope C-14 to date
organic remains such as wood, bone, and charcoal. It's usable in the range
of about 50,000 years to the present.
Here's why it works: Living animals (and people) absorb all the isotopes of
carbon. They absorb the unstable isotope Carbon-14, as well as the stable isotopes
C-13 and C-12. Carbon-14 decays into N-14 continuously. After an organism's
death, C-14 continues to decay but no new C-14 is added. So measuring the amount
of C-14 left (compared to the overall amount of carbon in the sample) tells
you how long ago the organism lived and died. There is only one problem. Radioactive
decay is not constant(Also,light speed has shown to be
SLOWING,since the first accurate measurements during the Rennaisance).
This long held canonical belief was exploded a few years ago on a national
TV broadcast of ABC'S "Good Morning America." On June 11th, 1997,
ABC broadcast a "live" test of a device created by Dr. James Patterson
of Clean Energy Technologies, Inc. The device was based on Patterson's previous
design of a heat producing "over-unity"(no
way!that's perpetual motion-free energy!) machine. His approach was very similar to the "cold fusion" work
of Pons and Fleischman, but his design uses small, perfectly round palladium
coated beads(what are the beads made of??!!!) in the machine.
The experiment consisted of circulating 7.5 grams of depleted uranium dissolved
in water and run through the "Patterson
Transmutation Coil." The experiment began at noon (Wednesday, May 28th
1997 in the laboratories of CETI in Sarasota, FL, USA)
with the Geiger Counter registering at 3760 CPM. After only a couple of hours,
the radioactivity was cut down more than half. The actual final reading achieved
was 1000 CPM (a 73.4% Reduction) as measured by the Geiger Counter after a
run time of 2 hours and 15 minutes(dammit!,there goes the four billion year
radiation damage caused by nuclear reactor fuel wastes AS PROMULGATED by eco-terrorists,Jane
Fonda's[i.e.,the Karen Silkwood sickening fallacy],ex-Soviet scientists,& Carl
Sagan).
Now according to every known "law" of physics, what happened during
this "live" experiment on ABC is flatly impossible! What What Patterson's
machine did was to take a natural process -- the decay of depleted uranium
-- and basically remove the radioactivity in a little over two hours. This
process should normally take over 4 billion years!
Even more exciting, this experiment has now been duplicated and patents have
been issued for several of Patterson's machines.
What this means is that using radioactive decay as a method for dating anything
is highly unreliable, because the core assumption -- that decay is constant
and immutable -- is flat wrong!(oops!-there goes Darwin,Engels,Marx,& evolution,ca.1848!)
And,don't forget,Copernicus was almost burned @ the stake for saying that Earth,and
all the planets,revolve around the sun!
HELLO!
Is digital tech,the new Rennaisance,and the internet,the new Gutenburg press?-OHYEAH!Jimbo
said it 1st just daze after 9/11/2k1-Mr.Spock WOULD approve!
Want more?Well,Ok,but YOU asked:
In fact, there are significant discrepancies between measurements made of
natural rates of radioactive decay in the 50's and today. The first measurements,
taken by the "father" of radiocarbon dating (Libby), listed the half
life of Carbon 14 as 5,568 years. By 1962, only 11 years later, the half-life
was "recalibrated" to be 5,730 years. By the mid eighties, some charts
were giving a figure of 6,380 years, a difference of 1.14 percent in only 36
years! The working assumption has always been that these earlier readings were "wrong" because
we all "know" that the rate of decay is constant. Since this is now
proven (via the Patterson demonstration) to be a fallacious assumption, we
cannot rely on the accuracy of the "radiocarbon" dates for any of
these earlier catastrophic events.
This 30-year discrepancy in the natural radioactive decay rates is therefore
attributed not to the use of a Patterson Machine -- this merely proved that
technological change of the same rates was possible -- but rather to the accelerating
space-time effects of the Hyper-Physics itself.
There is other evidence. In the last 20 years, after apparently remaining stable
for millennia, the rate of the Earth's rotation has begun to slow. More than
20 seconds have been added to atomic clocks in that space of time in order
to keep them synchronized with the Earth's actual rotation. And the number
of corrections necessary is increasing(yep,bios clocks,too,keep confirming
this).
The NEW planet:
...Certainly, evidence exists that we may be close to just such a circumstance.
This latest admission of the probable existence of a tenth planet is not the
first such story to hit the news. Indeed, it seems that NASA may have been
looking for the source of this "missing momentum" for years. In
1983, an announcement was made to the effect that the IRAS Infrared satellite
had discovered a massive and at that time inexplicable object very far out
in the solar system. JPL scientist Gerry Neugebauer and Cornell professor
Dr. James Houck were interviewed by the Washington Post and were quite unambiguous
in their assessment of the object. Saying that it was possibly a small star
but more probably was a large planet sized object, they were loath to classify
it, claiming that it was probably an entirely new class of planet or quasistellar
object. They both emphasized that the object was a true mystery and promised
to dig into its true nature. Curiously, when I inquired with Dr. Neugebauer
about the story recently and asked if there had been any papers published
on it, he claimed that he had been quoted "out of context" and
that he did not remember the object in question.
"
JeffW, I think the quote was taken out of context. I do not know about it nor
any follow-up. G Neugebauer"
Okay,like there's no frozen water on Mars,nor a structure on the cydonia plain that's a mile long,1000 feet in elevation and looks like a human face,gotcha!Yeah!