Creation Radiometric Dating and the Age of the Earth. “Science has proved that the earth is billion years old.” We have all heard this. It is retained as part of our archive on Creation magazine, but for a current summary of CMI's view on carbon dating, the reader is referred to Chapter 4, What. The field of radiocarbon dating has become a technical one far removed from the thus rendering a recent creation (6 to 10 thousand years ago) impossible.
This is common practice. All people start from their preconceived biases and prejustices. The fact is that for evolutionists science is no longer a search for truth; it is a search for the next grant.
As stone and wood are being re-used from previous buildings to construct new buildings, the carbon in the wood will be elevated in the strata. This will cause a false Carbon date to be assigned to the higher strata. This process might occur more than once for a specific piece of wood.
If wood from an old barn is used as an architectural decoration in another building; it might then be moved again to a third structure. Animals and plants that died in The Flood of Noah would have lower initial Carbon content than would be found in animals and plants today.
The water vapor canopy that existed from Creation to The Flood would have inhibited Carbon production in the atmosphere.
This would have reduced the amount of Carbon incorporated into the bodies of plants and animals prior to The Flood and the effect would be that the remains from prior to The Flood would appear to be much older than they really were. There would be a lower Carbon content in the atmosphere before The Flood because of a larger biomass exchanging gases with the atmosphere.
This biomass was larger than all the vegetation on earth today. There may have been less Carbon before The Flood of Noah because of the existence of the stronger magnetic field.
This would have prevented some or much of the cosmic ray bombardment of the upper atmosphere, the cause of Carbon generation. No one knows the exact amount of Carbon in the atmosphere at the time of creation. It is reasonable to consider that there have been none.
Creation Worldview Ministries: Carbon Dating Technique Does Not Work!
We have to take into consideration the effect of the bias of the person who interprets the data upon those dates which get published. The bias of the evolutionist interpreter of the Carbon data is that they see a normalized curve pattern as more important than the actual apparent age.
The Carbon dating method is known to have flaws which cause an uneven chronology. This attempt to calibrate Carbon utterly fails for two reasons.
The amount of Carbon in the atmosphere has not reached a constant level! This is a critical piece of information in demonstrating the useless nature of the Carbon dating technique. Stansfield, Science of Evolution New York: Ralph and Henry M. The ramifications of this information are stunning. Please consider the following list of examples of Carbon dates which demonstrate just how far off Carbon dates can be: Shells from living snails were carbon dated as being 2, years old. Mortar from an English castle less than years old, was Carbon dated as 7, years old.
Natural gas from Alabama and Mississippi Cretaceous and Eocene, respectively - should have been 50 to million years old according to evolutionary time scales; however, they were Carbon dated at 30, and 34, respectively.
A block of wood from the Cretaceous Period supposedly more than 70 million years old was found encased in a block of Cambrian rock hundreds of millions of years earlierbut was Carbon dated as 4, years old. Bones of a saber-toothed tiger from the LaBrea tar pits, supposedlyyears old, gave a Carbon date of 28, years old. Coal from Russia, dated as Pennsylvanian Period and supposedly million years old, was Carbon dated as only being 1, years old!
Mammoth bones from St.
The dates were challenged by evolutionists, but then re-confirmed. InTriceratops and Hadrosaur femurs were found in Montana. Bone collagen was radiocarbon dated. In one study of eleven sets of ancient human bones, all were dated at about 5, radiocarbon years or less.
Vereshchagin and Alexei N. Merelotovedenia Institute,p. This Carbon should be non-existent if the wood were more than aboutyears old. However, the limestone surrounding the wood was dated as Jurassic, supposedly million years old. Young radiocarbon date for ancient fossil wood challenges fossil dating, Creation 22 2: The 30 foot long tree presents a major problem for the arbitrary dating of the Geologic Column.
The evolutionary age assigned to the strata is Million Years Old. There should be no measurable Radioactive Carbon in this tree! The Carbon from the tree dated as 12, years old!! Burnt wood was found within Cretaceous Limestone, supposedly 65 to million years old. The C content was dated by Dr. This means that none of these footprints could be older than about 13, years according to the Carbon dating technique. Carbon has been found in very unexpected places, too.
Places that it should not exist at all. Carbon has been found inside twelve diamonds. They have been found to contain very high amounts of Carbon According to evolutionary assumptions, the diamonds were supposedly 1 to 3 billion years old. In Vardiman, L, A. A Snelling and E. Chaffin editorsRadioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, pp.
Hydrothermal vent fluids ejected from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge contain methane CH4 with Carbon contents ranging from 1. The authors believe that the hydrocarbons were produced by abiogenic Fischer-Tropsch type reactions.
Abiogenic hydrocarbon production at Lost City Hydrothermal Field. Carbon has been found in a gold mine. The Ar-Ar [Argon-Argon] radiometric dating method yielded a date of 32 million years old. The Carbon dating method yielded a date of 41, years old. Carbon has been found in coal. Carbon should not exist in any carbon compound supposedly older thanyears. Yet it has been impossible to find any natural carbon compound that does not contain significant Carbon, even those supposed to be millions and billions of years old.
In fact, we may say that almost all coal is the same age. There is no known correlation between the amount of Carbon contained in specific coal deposits and the supposed evolutionary geological age of that coal! EdsRadioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, Vol. Carbon has been found in natural gas deposits. Carbon has been found in natural gas supposedly to million years old. The carbon dioxide found in the Valverde Basin gas fields of southwest Texas has significant amounts of Carbon The Carbon dates supposedly range from 37, to 49, years old.
Carbon has been found in every portion of the Phanerozoic Age supposedly million years ago to the present! Organic samples from every portion of the Phanerozoic display detectable amounts of C, even in the standard radiocarbon literature.Bob Dutko: How Carbon Dating Actually Supports Creation
Libby] found a considerable discrepancy in his measurements indicating that, apparently, radiocarbon was being created in the atmosphere somewhere around 25 percent faster than it was becoming extinct. Since this result was inexplicable by any conventional scientific means, Libby put the discrepancy down to experimental error. If it does not entirely contradict them [our theories], we put it in a footnote. Richard Dawkins commented on Carbon!
Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker,p. The flaws in the Carbon dating technique are undeniably deep and serious! Despite 35 years of technological refinement and better understanding, the underlying assumptions have been strongly challenged, and warnings are out that radiocarbon may soon find itself in a crisis situation.
It should be no surprise, then, that fully half of the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half have come to be accepted. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates.
This whole blessed thing is nothing but 13th-century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read. Radioactive decay rates were different in the past. Recent experiments suggest that radioactive decay rates assumed to be constant can change due to causes that are not yet fully understood. Team member Jere Jenkins noted: Changes in radioactive decay rates can be induced! He ignored his test results, because he believed that the earth must be more than 20,—30, years old, in which case the amount of carbon must have had time to reach equilibrium and be constant.
The small amount of carbon that cosmic radiation produces in the upper atmosphere about 21 pounds per year was, therefore, diluted before the flood by the vast amounts of carbon in the lush vegetation growing on the earth. That vegetation, buried during the flood, became our coal, oil, and methane deposits.
During the flood [line B], some carbon entered the atmosphere as radioactive decay products.
That is still is happening. Carbon comes from two sources: Smaller, but also unknown, amounts of carbon are still escaping from the crust. Plants can then take in carbon dioxide, incorporating in their tissues both carbon radioactive and normal carbon non-radioactive in the same proportion as was in the atmosphere at that time. Therefore, carbon moves up the various food chains to enter animal tissue—again, in about the same ratio as carbon had with carbon in the atmosphere.
When a living thing dies, its radiocarbon loss decay is no longer replenished by intake, so its radiocarbon steadily decreases with a half-life of 5, years.
If we knew the ratio of carbon to carbon in an organism when it died, we could date its death. The assumption usually made is that the atmospheric ratio of carbon to carbon has always been about what it is today—about one in a trillion—so every living thing died with that ratio of carbon to carbon in its tissues.
The worldwide flood invalidated this standard assumption in a second way by uprooting and burying preflood forests. If that ratio has doubled since the flood and we did not know it, radiocarbon ages of things that lived soon after the flood would appear to be one half-life or 5, years older than their true ages.
Radiocarbon dating of vertical sequences of organic-rich layers at locations worldwide has consistently shown a surprising result. Instead, they increase at an accelerating rate. In other words, the concentration of carbon is unexpectedly low in the lower organic layers and becomes more so the deeper the layer.
Tree-ring dating provides information on past concentrations of carbon in the atmosphere. Some types of trees growing at high elevations with a steady supply of moisture will add only one ring each year. In other environments, multiple rings can be added in a year.
Some rings may show frost or fire damage. By comparing sequences of ring thicknesses and ring damage in two different trees, a correspondence can sometimes be shown. Trees of the same species that simultaneously grew within a few hundred miles of each other may have similar patterns. Trees of different species or trees growing in different environments have less-similar patterns. Claims are frequently made that these tree-ring thickness patterns of wood growing today can be matched up with those of some scattered pieces of dead wood, so that tree-ring counts can be extended back more than 8, years.
Then, the more questionable links are made based on the judgment of a tree-ring specialist. Standard statistical techniques could show how well the dozen supposedly overlapping tree-ring thickness patterns fit. However, in at least two instances tree-ring specialists have refused to subject their judgments to these statistical tests and would not release their data, so others could do these statistical tests. The standard, but less accurate, radiocarbon dating technique counts only the rare disintegrations of carbon atoms, which are sometimes confused with other types of disintegrations.
This new atomic accelerator technique has consistently detected carbon in every organic specimen—even materials that evolutionists claim are millions of years old, such as coal and dinosaur bones. In one study of eleven sets of ancient human bones, all were dated at about 5, radiocarbon years or less! Why are such tests rarely performed? Researchers naturally do not waste money on a technique that destroys their specimen and provides no specific age.
In an organic specimen thought to be older thanradiocarbon years, all carbon would have decayed, so an age could not be determined. Therefore, researchers will not radiocarbon date specimens they think are older thanyears. Conversely, if carbon is in any specimen, it must be less thanyears old, even if the researcher believes the specimen is millions of years old.
Bones or other organic remains that contain enough carbon and are believed to be older thanyears will be shown to be relatively young in blind radiocarbon tests.
Blind tests are explained on page This prediction, first published in the 6th editionp.