Carbon Dating Proved Wrong

How accurate are carbon-dating methods? All methods of radioactive dating rely on three assumptions that may not necessarily be true:. It is assumed that the rate of decay has remained constant over time. This assumption is backed by numerous scientific studies and is relatively sound. However, conditions may have been different in the past and could have influenced the rate of decay or formation of radioactive elements.

Evolutionists assume that the rate of cosmic bombardment of the atmosphere has always remained constant and that the rate of decay has remained constant. While there is no proof that the rates were different in the past than they are today, there is also no proof that they were the same. Thus radioactive dating relies purely on assumptions. We could put forward the following counter arguments to the constancy of these assumptions:. The current high rate of entry might be a consequence of a disturbed post-Flood environment that altered the carbon to carbon ratio.

Pre-Flood dates would thus have to be discarded. Some scientists argue that the magnetic field of the earth has carbon dating proved wrong over time. Carbon comes from nitrogen and is independent of the carbon reservoir. If even a small percentage of the limestone deposits were still in the form of living marine organisms at the time of the Flood, carbon dating proved wrong the small amount of carbon would have mixed with a much larger carbon reservoir, thus resulting in a drastically reduced ratio.

Specimens would then look much older than they actually are. It's assumed that the clock was set to zero when the study material was formed. This requires that only the parent isotope be initially present or that the amount of daughter isotope present at the beginning is known so that it can be subtracted. Many examples from literature show that the zero-reset assumption is not always valid. Volcanic ejecta of Mount Rangitoto Auckland, New Zealand was found to have a potassium age ofyears, yet trees buried within carbon dating proved wrong volcanic material were dated with the carbon method to be less than years old.

A further example from a lava flow off carbon dating proved wrong coast of Hawaii shows carbon dating proved wrong discrepancies. If dated with carbon dating proved wrong carbon method, the flow appears to be less than 17, years old, but dating with the potassium argon method gives dates ofto 43 million years. A rock sample from Nigeria was dated at 95 million years by the potassium-argon method, million years by the uranium-helium method, and less than 30 million years by the fission-track method.

If the clock is carbon dating proved wrong set to zero when a deposit forms, then there can be no starting point from which to calculate the age of a deposit. It is assumed that we are dealing with a closed system—no loss of either parent or daughter elements has occurred since the study material formed. No scientist can guarantee that any sample can be considered a carbon dating proved wrong system unless it was isolated from its environment when it was formed.

Elements can be transported into a sample or leach out of a sample. Scientists will reject theories about the age of the earth that do not conform to the norm. They will argue that the clock was not reset if the age is too old, or that isotopes were selectively removed if the age turns out to be too young. In the study on the Hawaii lava flow cited above, it was argued that entrapment of excessive amounts of argon gas had made the samples appear older than they were.

Radiometric dating techniques are thus based on sound scientific principles, but rely on so many basic assumptions that Bible believers need not have their faith shattered by data derived from these techniques. What do rock layers on the Earth's crust tell us about our origins and the age of the earth? For more on this subject, see the video Bones in Stones. Ogden III, "Annals of the New York Academy of Science," McDougall Polach and J.

Stipp, "Excess Radiogenic Argon in Young Subaerial Basalts From Auckland Volcanic Field, New Zealand," Geochemica et Cosmochemica Acta 33 Fisher, "Excess Rare Gases in a Subaerial Basalt from Nigeria," Nature A form of carbon found in organic materials and the basis of the carbon dating method. It seems your browser is out of date. Please update your browser to view this webpage properly. Click here for more information. Radiometric dating is a technique used to date materials using known carbon dating proved wrong rates.

Are radiometric dating methods accurate? A Basis for Conflict Downloadable 84kB. Does Radiometric Dating Prove the Earth is Old? Please help us to reduce the maintenance cost by upgrading you browser. Click here for more details. Help us reduce the maintenance cost of our online services. Because your computer is running an older version of internet browser, it no longer meets the features of modern websites.

You can help Amazing Discoveries reduce costs by upgrading or replacing your internet browser with one of the options below. We thank you in advance for partnering with us in this small but significant way. All methods of radioactive dating rely on three assumptions that may not necessarily be true: Rate of Decay It is assumed that the rate of decay has remained constant over time. A Basis for Conflict. Is there evidence for Creation science?

How does it compare to evolution? The following articles give insight in to these questions and more. Evolution Is Not Science—It's Religion Conforming Under Pressure The Big Bang Theory How Can We See Stars That Are Billions Of Light Years Away? Understanding the Creation Week Geocentricity: It's Time to Face the Facts The Rise of Evolutionary Thinking Earth's History:

Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating

Radioactive means that 14 C will decay emit radiation over time and become a different element. So we should never think it necessary to modify His Word. Or are the above statements all false, and the truth is something else? Since the rate of depletion has been accurately determined half of any given amount of carbon 14 decays in 5, years , scientists can calculate the time elapsed since something died from its residual carbon Is Carbon Dating Reliable? So if one does these three steps: These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.

Add a comment