Radiocarbon Dating: A Closer Look At Its Main Flaws | Great Discoveries in Archaeology
Carbon dating is the standard method used by scientists to determine the age of certain fossilized remains. As scientists will often claim. His technique, known as carbon dating, revolutionized the field of to distinguish if the radiocarbon is affected and therefore wrong or if it's not. Note that, contrary to a popular misconception, carbon dating is not .. The results of the carbon dating demonstrated serious problems for.
So I would expect to get some weird number like 16, years if you carbon date a millions of years old fossil. I explain the limits of Carbon dating below. One thing you might want to ask yourself though, is how do you know it is millions of years old, giving an "incorrect" date one that you think is too young or if it actually is only a few thousand years old.
As far as your comments that 16, years is older than when God created the earth, we know that there is more carbon in the atmosphere than there was a thousand years ago.
So a date of 9, or 16, years is more likely to be less. Perhaps only 6, years old. Something that is years old for example. But it is far from an exact Science. It is somewhat accurate back to a few thousand years, but carbon dating is not accurate past this.
Thirty thousand years is about the limit.
However, this does not mean that the earth is 30 thousand years old. It is much younger than that. Libbey knew that atmospheric carbon would reach equilibrium in 30, years. Because he assumed that the earth was millions of years old, he believed it was already at equilibrium.
This would make the earth less than 10, years old! But there is more carbon in the atmosphere now than there was 4 thousand years ago. Carbon dating makes an animal living 4 thousand years ago when there was less atmospheric carbon appear to have lived thousands of years before it actually did. What was the original amount of Carbon in the atmosphere?
A great book on the flaws of dating methods is "Radioisotopes and the age of the earth" edited by Larry Vardiman, Andrew Snelling, Eugene F. Published by Institute for Creation Research; December Dating methods are based on 3 unprovable and questionable assumptions: That the isotope abundances in the specimen dated have not been altered during its history by addition or removal of either parent or daughter isotopes 3 That when the rock first formed it contained a known amount of daughter material "Radioisotopes and the age of the earth" pg v We must recognize that past processes may not be occurring at all today, and that some may have occurred at rates and intensities far different from similar processes today.
Since no one was there, no one knows for sure. It's like trying to figure out how long a candle has been burning, without knowing the rate at which it burns, or its original size.
God cursed the ground the rocks too!
The problems with Carbon Dating | A Christian's Spiritual Journey 一個基督徒的屬靈旅程
See my commentary on Genesis 3 verse 17 ". Wouldn't this make all the rocks appear the same age? When each of these elements, uranium, potassium, radium etc. Let's say initially every radioactive element was "exploded" into existence from pre-existent elements.
Carbon Dating Gets a Reset
None of these early faster half-lives would be the same as they are today. From Nature magazine The carbon clock is getting reset.
- Thanks to Fossil Fuels, Carbon Dating Is in Jeopardy. One Scientist May Have an Easy Fix
- Is Carbon Dating Reliable?
Climate records from a Japanese lake are set to improve the accuracy of the dating technique, which could help to shed light on archaeological mysteries such as why Neanderthals became extinct. Carbon dating is used to work out the age of organic material — in effect, any living thing. The technique hinges on carbon, a radioactive isotope of the element that, unlike other more stable forms of carbon, decays away at a steady rate.
Radiocarbon Dating: A Closer Look At Its Main Flaws
Organisms capture a certain amount of carbon from the atmosphere when they are alive. By measuring the ratio of the radio isotope to non-radioactive carbon, the amount of carbon decay can be worked out, thereby giving an age for the specimen in question.
But that assumes that the amount of carbon in the atmosphere was constant — any variation would speed up or slow down the clock. Libby, the discoverer of the C14 dating method, was very disappointed with this problem.
He understood that archaeological artifacts were readily available. After all, this what the archeologist guessed in their published books. Some believe trees are known to be as old as 9, years. They use tree rings as the calibration standard. A lot of people doubt this claim for various good reasons I wont go into here. We believe all the dates over 5, years are really compressible into the next 2, years back to creation.
So when you hear of a date of 30, years for a carbon date we believe it to be early after creation and only about 7, years old. If something carbon dates at 7, years we believe 5, is probably closer to reality just before the flood.
Robert Whitelaw has done a very good job illustrating this theory using about 30, dates published in Radio Carbon over the last 40 years. One of the impressive points Whitewall makes is the conspicuous absence of dates between 4, and 5, years ago illustrating a great catastrophe killing off plant and animal life world wide the flood of Noah! I hope this helps your understanding of carbon dating.