Radiocarbon dating organic materials

The various confounding factors that can adversely affect the accuracy of carbon-14 dating methods are evident in many of the other radioisotope dating methods.

Although the half-life of some of them are more consistent with the evolutionary worldview of millions to billions of years, the assumptions used in radiometric dating put the results of all radiometric dating methods in doubt. Although the half-life of carbon-14 makes it unreliable for dating fossils over about 50,000 years old, there are other isotopes scientists use to date older artifacts.

Once our geologist had the “index fossil” that was found approximately in the same layer as the newly discovered fossil, he would then see where in the geologic column it came from and presto, he now had a date for his newly discovered fossil.

He would simply go to a chart that listed the geologic column by ‘ages’ and find the place where the index fossil appears, and thereby the geologists could tell the paleontologist how old his fossil was.

Any radiometric dates that show a supposedly “old” rock to be young are rejected “Few people realize that the index fossil dating system, despite its poor assumptions and many problems, is actually the primary dating tool for geologic time. In other words, radiometric dating methods are actually fit into the geological column, which was set up by [index] fossil dating over 100 years ago.”(Michael Oard, meteorologist and creationist scientist, 1984) All radiometric dating methods use this basic principle to extrapolate the age of artifacts being tested.

These long time periods are computed by measuring the ratio of daughter to parent substance in a rock, and inferring an age based on this ratio.

If it sounds like circular reasoning, it is because this process in reality is based upon circular reasoning.

If we reverse the process to find the age of an alleged rock, the geologist takes his rock to the paleontologist, and the paleontologist goes to the same exact chart and looks for the “index fossil(s)” that normally are found in those rock layers. Henry Morris as follows: “Index fossils” are types of fossil (such as ammonites and coelacanths) that 19th century European evolutionists of the Victorian era claimed lived and died out many millions of years ago.

These artifacts have gone through many carbon-14 half-lives, and the amount of carbon-14 remaining in them is miniscule and very difficult to detect.

That’s right, you guessed it, the paleontologist tells the geologist how old the rock is based upon its connection to those very same “index fossils.” The process of using index fossils is describes by the late Creationist author and Ph. The supposed age of “index fossils” is based on how long these 19th century evolutionists believed one kind of animal would take (somehow) to “evolve” into a different kind of animal.

For example, if they believed it would take 200 million years for an ammonite (somehow) to turn gradually into say a dog, then all rocks containing fossil ammonites (the “index fossil”) would be given an “age” 200 million years older than rocks containing fossils of dogs: “…

Levels of carbon-14 become difficult to measure and compare after about 50,000 years (between 8 and 9 half lives; where 1% of the original carbon-14 would remain undecayed).

The question should be whether or not carbon-14 can be used to date any artifacts at all? There are a few categories of artifacts that can be dated using carbon-14; however, they cannot be more 50,000 years old.

993

Leave a Reply