Does carbon dating fossils work
Yet a skeptic might point out that the amounts of C found in these organic samples are smaller than what one might expect if they are only about 4,500 years old.
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?
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.
And 4,500 years is less than one radiocarbon half-life, so from Figure 2 we might expect 4,500-year-old samples to have C found within organic samples thought to date from the time of the Flood is generally only about 0.1 to 0.5 p MC.
Evolutionists have long used the carbon-14, or radiocarbon, dating technique as a “hammer” to bludgeon Bible-believing Christians.
A global flood like the one described in the Bible would invalidate this assumption.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!In principle, this decay rate may be used to “date” the time since an organism’s death.But the calculated dates will only be accurate if the assumptions behind the method are correct.Virtually all fossils found within sedimentary rocks are the remains of creatures that perished during the Genesis Flood about 4,500 years ago.