Carbon dating is inaccurate

This is an important topic; for evolutionists want the history of earth to span long ages, in the hope that this will make the origin and evolution of life more likely.

Therefore we shall devote an entire chapter to a discussion of every significant method, used by scientists today, to date ancient substances.

Radiocarbon dating can still be considered a reliable method for determine the age of artefacts and materials, according to a study published this week.

Recently, it was suggested that the dates offered by radiocarbon dating are increasingly being distorted by external factors.

Human carbon dioxide emissions have sped up the reduction of the carbon isotope 14C in the Earth’s atmosphere, bringing into question the accuracy of the method’s results.

The author of a new study published in the journal argues that the level of distortion caused by anthropogenic emissions can actually be precisely identified.

By contrast, this revised approach has the effect of `compressing' radiocarbon time,' and speeding up the rate of man's cultural development."—Erich A.For example: “Nobody cites the many hundreds of C Carbon-14 is radioactive—therefore, it decays over time.It can be used as a dating tool because creatures and plants accumulate it during their lifetimes, and cease doing so when they die. If four essential facts are known, an age can be calculated with precision.They are: (1) the C14 concentration in a specimen at its time of death; (2) the decay rate of C14; (3) the current C14 concentration in the specimen being “dated”; and (4) if anything else has affected the specimen’s C14 content. The curved line represents the declining amount of C14 atoms over time due to radioactive decay.Note: only the third of those four necessary facts can be measured, the other three must be estimated, assumed, or extrapolated. During each half-life (~5,730 years), about half of the remaining C14 atoms in a specimen are expected to decay.In contrast, science textbooks can hardly be found that do not refer to human or “pre-human” remains 10,000 to millions of years old. C” or “C-14” appear within a quote, they are shown as they were published.) Contrary to popular perception, carbon dating is not a precise answer-all to chronology questions. The narrator indicated that they have samples dated “because they want to know exactly how old the skeleton is.” A famous American colleague, Professor Brew, briefly summarized a common attitude among archaeologists. And if it is completely ‘out of date,’ we just drop it.” Few archaeologists who have concerned themselves with absolute chronology are innocent of having sometimes applied this method.” Although the symposium was held in 1970, the point is still relevant.

You must have an account to comment. Please register or login here!