2010年4月25日，一队由香港与土耳其人组成的探索队于香港举行新闻发布会，向世界宣布在土耳其亚拉腊山上发现可能是挪亚方舟的余骸。在新闻发布会前后，这支探索队伍的代表四出联络、谨慎地寻找能给他们正面支持又认同此事的科学家。

## Skype 视频会议

2010年4月20日，我跟这支探索队伍的数名香港队员进行Skype视频会议(我当时身处美国肯塔基州北部，时间为清晨，香港时间则为晚上)。在视频会议上，他们给我播放在亚拉腊山探险的录像片段，这片段也在发布会当天播出。他们也给我展示了一些照片，显示埋在亚拉腊山上的一件木结构及其内部情况(如图1)。

## 未曾披露的碳-14测定结果

Table 1. The C-14 test results obtained by the discovery team

Labora- tory Sample A (DB) Sample B (SS) Sample C (PW) Sample D (BS) Details Remarks
Labora- tory 1 N/A δ13C =
-26.9% Activity higher than 100% of modern level. It means that this tree was growing after 1955.
C-14 age = 120±25 years BP δ13C =
-26.5%
I asked the lab that B and C belonged to the same structure and how came the great difference. He replied that he did not know our collection method and the place and explained that C was from the inner part of the tree and B was the bark.
C-14 age = 610±25 years BP δ13C =
-26.4%
Labora- tory 2 Modern Age post-1950 AD as it clearly shows signs of nuclear weapons testing enrichment Samples A and B were practically collected from the same site (the location team members abseiling down), in reply to my query whether the samples were contaminated by moss and bacteria growth. The lab replied: the older age of sample B might be due to Suess Effect of diluted C-14 by fossil fuel.
C-14 age = 135±30 years BP δ13C relative to VPDB =
-25.2%
Labora- tory 3 C-14 age = 4269–4800 years BP Method employed: Radiocarbon and Dendro- chronology; Calendric Age calBP 6891±4647; 68% range calBP: 2243–11538; Calendric Age calBC: 4941±4647

-26.9‰ 碳活性较现代水平高100% 意思是此树在1955年之后生长

碳-14

±25年
δ13C =
-26.5‰

碳-14

±25年
δ13C =
-26.4‰

碳-14

±30年
δ13C 相对于VPDB标准 =
-25.2‰

4800年
所用方法︰放射性碳测年法及树轮年代法；日历年龄为BP校正6891
±4647年；BP校正范围68%可能性: 2243 -11538年;日历年龄为公元前校正4941
±4647年

## 大洪水前木化石的碳-14测年

 (a) (b) (c) (d)

(a) 渐新世木，来自美国科罗拉多州Cripple Creek的 Cresson矿场
(b) 始新世木，来自澳洲昆士兰省Crinum矿场
(c) 侏罗纪木，来自英国沃里克郡Edge Hill的Horton采石场
(d) 三叠纪木，来自澳洲新南威尔士省Bundanoon的Hawkesbury砂岩

Table 2. C-14 dating results for fossil woods from the geologic record of the Flood.

Location Conventional Age C-14 age (BP)
Geologic Numerical
Cripple Creek, Colorado, USA Oligocene 32 million years 41,260±540 years
Crinum, Queensland, Australia Eocene 45 million years 29,544±759 years
37,800±3,450 years
44,700±950 years
Redding area, California, USA Cretaceous 112–120 million years 32,780±230 years
33,490±240 years
37,150±330 years
42,390±510 years
Edge Hill, Warwickshire, England, UK Jurassic 189 million years 20,700±1,200 years
22,730±170 years
24,005±600 years
28,820±350 years
Bundanoon, New South Wales, Australia Triassic 22–230 million years 33,720±430 years
Toukley, New South Wales, Australia Permian 250 million years 33,700±400 years

±540年

±759年
37,800
±450年
44,700
±950年

1亿2,000万年
32,780
±230年
33,490
±240年
37,150
±330年
42,390
±510年

±12,00年
22,730
±170年
24,005
±600年
28,820
±350年

2亿3,000万年
33,720
±430年

±400年

## 附录 - δ13C参数

### Footnotes

1. 关于创造、历史性全球大洪水及年轻地球的圣经及地质个案，其辩护及展述，详见︰Mortenson, T., and T. H. Ury, eds. 2008. Coming to grips with Genesis: Biblical authority and the age of the earth. Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books. (See especially chapter 9, pp. 251–281, “Noah’s Flood and its geological implications,” by William D. Barrick.) Snelling, A. A. 2009. Earth’s catastrophic past: geology, Creation and the Flood, 2 volumes. Dallas, Texas: Institute for Creation Research. Back
2. Faure, G., and T.M. Mensing. 2005. Isotopes: principles and applications, third edition, pp. 614-625. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Back
3. Bowman, S. 1990. Radiocarbon dating: interpreting the past. London: British Museum Publications. Back
4. Dicken, A.P. 2005. Radiogenic isotope geology, second edition, pp. 383-398. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Back
5. Beukens, R.P. 2007. Radiocarbon analysis report, February 9, 2007. University of Toronto, Canada: IsoTrace Radiocarbon Laboratory. Beukens, R.P. 2007. Radiocarbon analysis report, July 28, 2007. University of Toronto, Canada: IsoTrace Radiocarbon Laboratory. Back
6. Baillie, M.G.L. 1982. Tree-ring dating and archaeology. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Back
7. Baumgardner, J. R. 2005. 14C evidence for a recent global Flood and a young earth. In Radioisotopes and the age of the earth: results of a young-earth creationist research initiative, eds. L. Vardiman, A. A. Snelling and E. F. Chaffin, pp. 587–630. El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation Research, and Chino Valley, Arizona: Creation Research Society. Back
8. Whitelaw, R.L. 1970. Time, life, and history in the light of 15,000 radiocarbon dates. Creation Research Society Quarterly 7(1):56-71. Back
9. Vogel, J.S., D.E. Nelson, and J.R. Southern. 1987. 14C background levels in an accelerator mass spectrometry system. Radiocarbon 29:323-333. Back
10. Giem, P. 2001. Carbon-14 content of fossil carbon. Origins 51:6-30. Back
11. Snelling, A. A. 1997. Radioactive “Dating” in Conflict!. Creation Ex Nihilo 20 no. 1:24–27. Snelling, A. A. 1998. Stumping Old-Age Dogma. Creation Ex Nihilo 20 no. 4:48–51. Snelling, A. A. 1999. Dating Dilemma: Fossil Wood in “Ancient” Sandstone. Creation Ex Nihilo 21 no. 3:39–41. Snelling, A. A. 2000. Geological Conflict. Creation Ex Nihilo 22 no. 2:44–47. Snelling, A. A. 2000. Conflicting ‘Ages’ of Tertiary Basalt and Contained Fossilised Wood. Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 14 no. 2:99–122. Snelling, A. A. 2008. Radiocarbon in “ancient” fossil wood, Impact #415. Dallas, Texas: Institute for Creation Research. Snelling, A. A. 2008. Radiocarbon Ages for Fossil Ammonites and Wood in Cretaceous Strata near Redding, California. Answers Research Journal 1:123–144. Back
12. Baumgardner, J.R., A.A. Snelling, D.R. Humphreys, and S.A. Austin. 2003. Measurable 14C in fossilized organic materials: confirming the young earth Creation-Flood model. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on creationism, ed. R.L. Ivey, Jr., pp. 127-142. Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship. Back
13. Sternberg, R.S. 1992. Radiocarbon fluctuations and the geomagnetic field. In Radiocarbon after four decades: an interdisciplinary perspective, eds. R.E. Taylor, A. Long and R.S. Kra, pp. 93-116. New York: Springer-Verlag. Back
14. Barnes, T.G. 1973. Electromagnetics of the earth’s field and evaluation of electric conductivity, current and joule peaking in the earth’s core. Creation Research Society Quarterly 9(4):222-230. Humphreys, D.R. 1983. The creation of the earth’s magnetic field. Creation Research Society Quarterly 20(1):89-90. Humphreys, D.R. 1986. Reversals of the earth’s magnetic field during the Genesis Flood. In Proceedings of the first international conference on creationism, volume II, eds. R.E. Walsh, C.L. Brooks and R.S. Crowell, pp. 113-123. Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship. Back
15. Merrill R.T., and N.W. McElhinney. 1983. The earth’s magnetic field. London: Academic Press. Back
16. Brown, R.H. 1979. The interpretation of C-14 dates. Origins 6:30-44. Morton, G.R. 1984. The carbon problem. Creation Research Society Quarterly 20(4):212-219. Scharpenseel H.W., and P. Becker-Heidmann. 1992. Twenty-five years of radiocarbon dating soils: paradigm of erring and learning. Radiocarbon 34:541-549. Back
17. Faure and Mensing, Ref. 1. Dicken, Ref. 3. Back
18. Craig, H. 1954. Carbon-13 in plants and the relationships between carbon-13 and carbon-14 variations in nature. Journal of Geology 62:115-149. Craig, H. 1957. Isotopic standards for carbon and oxygen and correction factors for mass-spectrometric analysis of carbon dioxide. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 12:133-149. Back
19. Mook, W.G., and H.J. Streurman. 1983. Physical and chemical aspects of radiocarbon dating. Physical and Chemical Techniques in Archaeology 8:31-55. Back