The Carbon-14 method of dating can be used to date things that were once living such as wood, animal skins, tissue, and bones (provided they are not mineralized). Due to the short half-life (5,730 years) of Carbon-14, this method can only be used to date things that are less than 50,000 years old (max). And though some evolutionists claim that it is accurate up to 40,000 years,1 in reality it is highly unreliable for anything over 5,000 years old.For example, roughly half of the dates produced by this method are rejected by archeologists as being either too far off or impossible.2 Those who think it is accurate beyond 5,000 years should know that C-14 has been used to date over 20 different Dinosaur Bones and other Artifacts associated with dinosaurs (such as wood and trees from Axel Heiberg Island, and coal), 3,4,5,6 and in every case ages of between 9,800 and 50,000 years were obtained. Other methods of radiometric dating require the use of various unverifiable assumptions and are also, for that reason (and various others), highly questionable.
For those who wonder why dates that are older than 6,000 years are often obtained by this method, consider the words of Sylvia Baker:
"Many crucial objections cast doubt on the reliability of this method. We shall consider just two of them.
1. The theory assumes that carbon-14 is in equilibrium in the atmosphere -- that it is being broken down at the same rate at which it is being produced. However, calculations made to test this assumption suggest that carbon-14 is being produced nearly one third faster than it is disintegrating. If this is true, then none of the fossils that have been dated by this method could be more than a few thousand years old..."
2. ... It is also true that cosmic rays would have been deflected away from the earth most effectively by the earth's magnetic field if, as we have argued, this was much stronger in the past. With fewer cosmic rays reaching the atmosphere, there would have been less production of carbon-14 then than now.
Thus we have seen that evolutionists have no really reliable method of dating fossils..." 7
Furthermore, the Carbon-14 dates for dinosaur bones (and carbonized wood associated with dino strata) are in serious conflict with the purported 65 million year "date" for their extinction. This presents a problem for evolution, and the Geological Time Chart itself, especially since the possibility of contamination from surrounding soil was eliminated. In addition, many of the samples were sent to different labs for comparison dating. Yet, in spite of these facts, when a mammoth or Neanderthal bone is "dated" at 35,000 years it is accepted as fact and proclaimed widely in popular publications, while similarly preserved (i.e. unfossilized) dinosaur bones, (yielding similar dates) are scoffed at by evolution believers and/or ignored by virtually all supposedly objective "science" publications: I.E. those that are still covering for the virtually bankrupt theory of evolution, and whose editors are so filled with Pride that they don't even want to look at the evidence before them, much less admit the very likely possibility that they were wrong.
The conclusion by many scientists and others who are aware of this is that radiometric dating methods are nothing more than guesses that are based more on highly speculative theories rather than on facts, and that it is very likely that Dinosaurs did not become extinct 65 million years ago, as we have been told (over and over and over again) by the mass media, but rather in the recent past. Perhaps that's why two of them are described in detail on the Old Testament book of Job, and why numerous artifacts that clearly depict them (i.e. the Ica Stones) have been found at archeological sites in Mexico and South America.
1. "The Dating Game," Discover, 9/92, p. 78;
2. "Radiocarbon: Ages in Error"; Robert E. Lee, Anthropological Journal of Canada,
Vol. 19, #3, 1981, pp. 9-29;
3. "Direct Dating of Cretaceous-Jurassic Fossils" Available from CRSEF, P.O. Box 292,
Columbus, OH, 43216.
4. "Stumping Old Age Dogma"; Andrew Snelling; Creation Ex Nihilo; Sept-Nov. 1998;
pp. 48-51.
5. "Radioactive 'Dating' In Conflict"; Andrew Snelling; Creation Ex Nihilo; Dec-Feb,
1998; pp. 24-27
6. "Dating In Conflict"; Hansruedi Stutz; Creation Ex Nihilo; Mar-May 1997; pp. 42-43
7. Bone of Contention: Is Evolution True, Sylvia Baker, 1986, p. 27.
Copyright, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, Randy S. Berg; No part of this paper may be reproduced, used, or sold for profit
without the express written consent of the author. Copies may be distributed freely for educational purposes onlyFurther Reading The Case of the KBS Tuff Radiometric Dating
Carbon-14 in the Atmosphere The Earth's Decaying Magnetic Field
Papers on Carbon 14:
"MEASURABLE 14C IN FOSSILIZED ORGANIC MATERIALS..."
by Baumgardner, Humphreys, Snelling and Austin.
See also papers by:
Curt Sewel, Do-While Jones, Michael J. Oard
See also:
Accuracy of Carbon 14
Unfossilized Dinosaur Bones
Hugh Miller's Letter to the Editor
Carbon-14 and the Age of the Earth
Billion-fold acceleration of radioactivity demonstrated in Laboratory
Consequences of Time Dependent Nuclear Decay Indices on Half Lives
