Carbon dating a fossil
Knowing that small concentrations of collagen can attract contamination, they compared precision Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) tests of collagen and bioapatite (hard carbonate bone mineral) with conventional counting methods of large bone fragments from the same dinosaurs. Mary Schweitzer, associate professor of marine, earth, and atmospheric sciences at North Carolina State University, surprised scientists in 2005 when she reported finding soft tissue in dinosaur bones.
These, together with many other remarkable concordances between samples from different fossils, geographic regions and stratigraphic positions make random contamination as origin of the C-14 unlikely". She started a firestorm of controversy in 20 when she reported that she had sequenced proteins in the dinosaur bone.
He said that his team and the laboratories they employed took special care to avoid contamination.
Since dinosaurs are thought to be over 65 million years old, the news is stunning - and more than some can tolerate.After the AOGS-AGU conference in Singapore, the abstract was removed from the conference website by two chairmen because they could not accept the findings.Carbon-14 is considered to be a highly reliable dating technique.And why would the standard pretreatment used at the University of Bristol’s radiocarbon lab fail to remove contamination—the very basis for using radiocarbon to make age estimates for archaeological samples? Radiocarbon labs do not generally release carbon date results for samples that have less radiocarbon than their chosen background blanks. The study authors addressed none of these crucial challenges.
Search for carbon dating a fossil:
Her report in 2009 confirmed the presence of collagen and other proteins that bacteria do not make.