Carbon dating debate

posted by | Leave a comment

For more on this subject, see the video Bones in Stones i. Ogden III, "Annals of the New York Academy of Science," 288 (1977): 167-173.

An age could be estimated by measuring the amount of carbon-14 present in the sample and comparing this against an internationally used reference standard.

Carbon-14 comes from nitrogen and is independent of the carbon-12 reservoir.

If even a small percentage of the limestone deposits were still in the form of living marine organisms at the time of the Flood, then the small amount of carbon-14 would have mixed with a much larger carbon-12 reservoir, thus resulting in a drastically reduced ratio.

It is assumed that we are dealing with a closed system—no loss of either parent or daughter elements has occurred since the study material formed.

No scientist can guarantee that any sample can be considered a closed system unless it was isolated from its environment when it was formed.

Many examples from literature show that the zero-reset assumption is not always valid.

Scientists place great faith in this dating method, and yet more than 50% of radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples of northeastern North America have been deemed unacceptable after investigation.While there is no proof that the rates were different in the past than they are today, there is also no proof that they were the same.Thus radioactive dating relies purely on assumptions.This assumption is backed by numerous scientific studies and is relatively sound.However, conditions may have been different in the past and could have influenced the rate of decay or formation of radioactive elements.

Help us reduce the maintenance cost of our online services.

Leave a Reply

tokyo adult sex dating service websites