Books on carbon dating cool opening lines for dating

Yet this assumption leads to a contradiction: If these organic samples really are many millions of years old, then they should be radiocarbon “dead.” But they aren’t! Evolutionists have attempted to blame these surprising results on a number of mechanisms. Furthermore, laboratories take great pains to keep contamination to a minimum, and researchers have found that, provided a sufficiently large testing sample is used (in the ballpark of 100 milligrams or so), the amount of such possible lab contamination is negligible compared to the C already present within the specimen.

Finally, although contamination can sometimes occur, it should not be assumed in a particular instance unless there are good reasons to believe that it has.

One of these assumptions is that nuclear decay rates have always been constant.

Are these high radiocarbon “ages” a problem for the biblical worldview? First, remember that no detectable should be present within these samples if they really are millions of years old.Despite this apparent difficulty for the recent-creation view, this is, in fact, a much more serious problem for the old-earth view!When today’s rates are used to calculate ages from certain radioisotope ratios, the results indicate that billions of years’ worth of nuclear decay of the heavier radioisotopes has occurred.But there is evidence that this decay occurred in accelerated “spurts,” Why the High Radiocarbon Age Estimates?However, these excessively long ages are easily explained within the biblical worldview, and C should be present in specimens that are even a little more than 100,000 years old!

Nearly anyone can verify this for themselves using basic multiplication and division.And a radiocarbon result that contradicts old-earth dogma is not a good enough reason by itself to invoke contamination!Assumptions…Assumptions Instead of arbitrarily blaming these anomalous results on contamination, a far better (and more scientific) approach would be to question the correctness of the assumptions behind radioisotope dating methods.Radioisotope dating methods involving the heavier, longer-lived isotopes (methods such as uranium-lead, potassium-argon, etc.) are one of the main justifications that evolutionists use to argue for such vast ages.Because these radioisotope methods yield age estimates of many millions of years for igneous rocks, it is thought that sedimentary rocks are also millions of years old, as well as the organic remains found within them.Virtually all fossils found within sedimentary rocks are the remains of creatures that perished during the Genesis Flood about 4,500 years ago.