Is There Evidence That Carbon-14 Dating Proves a (biology) Young Earth?
By Russ Miller
As I discussed in a previous article comparing Darwinism to what is actually validated by real science, Carbon Dating relies on several assumptions which corrupt the reliability of the dates that it obtains. Although specific dates are not likely to be reliable, Carbon Dating really does support the biblical account that the earth was judged by a global flood in the recent past.
By the recent past I mean thousands of years as compared to the millions of years that are required by the Darwinian belief system, which does not allow for any flood of biblical proportions.
Although the Bible is not a book of science, it discusses nothing that conflicts with real science. This, I believe, is sufficient reason to consider that what the Bible says about a global flood should be taken into consideration by scientists sincerely seeking the truth about our world.
Look at it this way. If the Bible account of a global flood is true it would mean that just about every condition that existed in our world before this great flood would be drastically different after such a flood. And if this is true, it would very dramatically affect the test results of anything subjected to Carbon-14 dating that lived or existed before such a flood.
The Bible describes what sounds very much like a global green-house condition in which the planet was protected by a canopy which likely filtered out ultraviolet rays (the source of Carbon-14) and therefore made the collection of Carbon-14 very rare. However, Carbon-14 dating continues to be used without any regard to the possibility that a global flood occurred or that conditions that lent themselves to the collection of Carbon-14 might have resulted because of such a flood.
Scientists are caught up in a real quandary. For example, scientists generally agree that measurable amounts of Carbon-14 should decay away in less than 100,000 years. Therefore, since there would be no measurable Carbon-14 left to measure if the item had been dead for more than 100,000 years, Carbon Dating cannot assign an age to an item older than 100,000 years old, or older.
This is of particular interest because secular teachings claim that the Carboniferous layer formed about 250,000,000 years ago, which is 2,500 one-thousand-year periods of time. Therefore, Carbon-14 should never be found in this layer, unless the layer is less than 100,000 years old.
However, scientific studies on coal recovered from the Carboniferous layer reveal that all coal deposits still contain amounts of Carbon-14! In fact, never has any coal layer been found that does not contain Carbon-14.
By itself, this is strong proof that the earth’s strata layers, from which all old-earth beliefs have been derived, can only be a few thousand years old, and the only viable explanation how the earth’s strata layers all formed recently is that the world we live on endured a global flood sometime within the last few thousand years.
Russ Miller is author of The GENESIS Report Series. Register at http://www.new-earth-thought.com to receive FREE his 50 Facts vs. Darwinism e-mail series.
Your Source For Sciene News And Information
Is Potassium-Argon Dating Reliable?
By Russ Miller
When compared to real science, radiometric (also called radioisotope) dating methods used by Darwinian scientists fall far short of being scientific. Many wild guesses are made which corrupt the reliability of the radioisotope dating techniques.
Bear in mind that these radioisotope dating methods are not a measure of time; but rather a method of accounting for the amount of radioactive decay that has occurred within a certain type of radioactive element.
For example, consider Potassium-Argon (Ar-K) dating.
It is a scientific fact that Potassium 40 decays into Argon 40. It is also a scientific fact that a scientist trained to work with radiometric dating techniques can grind up a rock and very accurately measure the amount of potassium 40, and the amount of Argon 40, that is contained in the rock sample that he or she is working with.
These are plain and simple scientific facts that can be tested, observed, studied and repeated. It is also a plain and simple fact that this is where the science comes to an end with regard to the radiometric dating methods.
At this point in time, to derive the age of the rock based on the amount of radioactive decay which has occurred, several wild guesses, which are referred to as assumptions, must be made. It is these assumptions that completely corrupt the integrity of the radiometric dating methods.
The following examples point out major faults with Potassium-Argon dating:
Example No. One:
A scientist using the radiometric dating methods in order to ascertain the age of a rock must assume that the rate of decay from Potassium 40 to Argon 40 has always remained the same. Since no one was there to test, study or observe that the rate of decay has always been the same, this single wild guess, if incorrect, will cause the supposed age obtained by this particular dating method to be off by millions or billions of years.
Example No. Two:
A scientist using the radiometric dating methods in order to derive the age of a rock must assume that there was not any Argon 40 in the rock when the rock first formed. Since no one was there to test, study or observe that there was not any Argon 40 in the rock when the rock first formed, this single wild guess, if incorrect, will cause the supposed age obtained by this particular dating method to be off by millions or billions of years.
Example No. Three:
A scientist using the radiometric dating methods in order to get an age to assign to a rock must assume that the rock was never contaminated with either Potassium 40 or with Argon 40. In other words, everyone is supposed to believe that this rock laid there for millions or billions of years and was never contaminated by the elements being measured. We are to blindly trust that the rock never lost or gained either Potassium 40 or Argon 40. Since Argon 40 is a gas that can easily pass from one rock to the next this is an incredulous assumption, especially since it is well documented that heat, pressure, earthquakes and moisture can all cause contamination to occur.
As in the previous two examples, since no one was there to test, study or observe that the rock was never contaminated with either Potassium 40 or with Argon 40, this single wild guess, if incorrect, will cause the supposed age obtained by this particular dating method to be off by millions or billions of years.
These three wild guesses alone reveal the corruption involved in the radioisotope dating techniques. These methods are completely unreliable when used to obtain the age of any particular rock.
Russ Miller is author of The GENESIS Report Series. Register at http://www.new-earth-thought.com to receive FREE his 50 Facts vs. Darwinism e-mail series.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply