Carbon dating and the bible Free chat room faq adult

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!

carbon dating and the bible-34carbon dating and the bible-43carbon dating and the bible-81

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.We find that about 18 such halvings are required for the p MC value to drop below 0.001 (Figures 1 and 2).(We could “round up” the value of 0.0007 p MC at 17 half-lives to 0.001 p MC, but the 0.00038 p MC at 18 half-lives is definitely below the detection threshold.) Since each half-life is 5,730 years, this means that no C has even been detected in diamonds, which some scientists claim are billions of years old!Second, such large calculated ages are based on the C/C ratio has remained unchanged for tens of thousands of years.

A global flood like the one described in the Bible would invalidate this assumption.

Creation scientists have estimated (based upon the amounts of organic matter thought to be contained within the sedimentary layers) that the carbon in the pre-Flood biosphere may have been 300 to 700 times greater than what is present in today’s world.

C/C ratio was 500 times smaller than today’s value, this would be equivalent to 100 p MC/500 = 0.2 p MC.

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?

If the scientist did not realize that the pre-Flood C/C ratio was hundreds of times smaller than today’s value, he would calculate the animal’s age to be approximately 9 × 5,730 years = 51,570 years old—even though it had just died!