Carbon dating is wrong

Clearly, such huge time periods cannot be fitted into the Bible without compromising what the Bible says about the goodness of God and the origin of sin, death and suffering—the reason Jesus came into the world (See Six Days? He said, This only makes sense with a time-line beginning with the creation week thousands of years ago.

carbon dating is wrong-78carbon dating is wrong-89carbon dating is wrong-71

Familiar to us as the black substance in charred wood, as diamonds, and the graphite in “lead” pencils, carbon comes in several forms, or isotopes.

One rare form has atoms that are 14 times as heavy as hydrogen atoms: carbon-14, or C ratio gets smaller.

It cannot be used to date volcanic rocks, for example.

The rate of decay of N in 5,730 years (plus or minus 40 years).

Since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism (see Noah's Flood…, How did animals get from the Ark to isolated places? ), fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give radiocarbon ages older than they really are.

In summary, the carbon-14 method, when corrected for the effects of the flood, can give useful results, but needs to be applied carefully.Overall, the energy of the Earth's magnetic field has been decreasing,[5] so more C is being produced now than in the past.This will make old things look older than they really are.The strength of the Earth's magnetic field affects the amount of cosmic rays entering the atmosphere.A stronger magnetic field deflects more cosmic rays away from the Earth.These techniques are applied to igneous rocks, and are normally seen as giving the time since solidification.

Tags: , ,