Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CARBON DATING UNDERCUTS EVOLUTION'S LONG AGES
ICR ^ | October, 2003 | John Baumgardner

Posted on 09/25/2003 2:46:02 PM PDT by HalfFull

Evolutionists generally feel secure even in the face of compelling creationist arguments today because of their utter confidence in the geological time scale. Even if they cannot provide a naturalistic mechanism, they appeal to the "fact of evolution," by which they mean an interpretation of earth history with a succession of different types of plants and animals in a drama spanning hundreds of millions of years.

The Bible, by contrast, paints a radically different picture of our planet's history. In particular, it describes a time when God catastrophically destroyed the earth and essentially all its life. The only consistent way to interpret the geological record in light of this event is to understand that fossil-bearing rocks are the result of a massive global Flood that occurred only a few thousand years ago and lasted but a year. This Biblical interpretation of the rock record implies that the animals and plants preserved as fossils were all contemporaries. This means trilobites, dinosaurs, and mammals all dwelled on the planet simultaneously, and they perished together in this world-destroying cataclysm.

Although creationists have long pointed out the rock formations themselves testify unmistakably to water catastrophism on a global scale, evolutionists generally have ignored this testimony. This is partly due to the legacy of the doctrine of uniformitarianism passed down from one generation of geologists to the next since the time of Charles Lyell in the early nineteenth century. Uniformitarianism assumes that the vast amount of geological change recorded in the rocks is the product of slow and uniform processes operating over an immense span of time, as opposed to a global cataclysm of the type described in the Bible and other ancient texts.

With the discovery of radioactivity about a hundred years ago, evolutionists deeply committed to the uniformitarian outlook believed they finally had proof of the immense antiquity of the earth. In particular, they discovered the very slow nuclear decay rates of elements like Uranium while observing considerable amounts of the daughter products from such decay. They interpreted these discoveries as vindicating both uniformitarianism and evolution, which led to the domination of these beliefs in academic circles around the world throughout the twentieth century.

However, modern technology has produced a major fly in that uniformitarian ointment. A key technical advance, which occurred about 25 years ago, involved the ability to measure the ratio of 14C atoms to 12C atoms with extreme precision in very small samples of carbon, using an ion beam accelerator and a mass spectrometer. Prior to the advent of this accelerator mass spectrometer (AMS) method, the 14C/12C ratio was measured by counting the number of 14C decays. This earlier method was subject to considerable "noise" from cosmic rays.

The AMS method improved the sensitivity of the raw measurement of the 14C/12C ratio from approximately 1% of the modern value to about 0.001%, extending the theoretical range of sensitivity from about 40,000 years to about 90,000 years. The expectation was that this improvement in precision would make it possible to use this technique to date dramatically older fossil material.1 The big surprise, however, was that no fossil material could be found anywhere that had as little as 0.001% of the modern value!2 Since most of the scientists involved assumed the standard geological time scale was correct, the obvious explanation for the 14C they were detecting in their samples was contamination from some source of modern carbon with its high level of 14C. Therefore they mounted a major campaign to discover and eliminate the sources of such contamination. Although they identified and corrected a few relatively minor sources of 14C contamination, there still remained a significant level of 14C—typically about 100 times the ultimate sensitivity of the instrument—in samples that should have been utterly "14C-dead," including many from the deeper levels of the fossil-bearing part of the geological record.2

Let us consider what the AMS measurements imply from a quantitative standpoint. The ratio of 14C atoms to 12C atoms decreases by a factor of 2 every 5730 years. After 20 half-lives or 114,700 years (assuming hypothetically that earth history goes back that far), the 14C/12C ratio is decreased by a factor of 220, or about 1,000,000. After 1.5 million years, the ratio is diminished by a factor of 21500000/5730, or about 1079. This means that if one started with an amount of pure 14C equal to the mass of the entire observable universe, after 1.5 million years there should not be a single atom of 14C remaining! Routinely finding 14C/12C ratios on the order of 0.1-0.5% of the modern value—a hundred times or more above the AMS detection threshold—in samples supposedly tens to hundreds of millions of years old is therefore a huge anomaly for the uniformitarian framework.

This earnest effort to understand this "contamination problem" therefore generated scores of peer-reviewed papers in the standard radiocarbon literature during the last 20 years.2 Most of these papers acknowledge that most of the 14C in the samples studied appear to be intrinsic to the samples themselves, and they usually offer no explanation for its origin. The reality of significant levels of 14C in a wide variety of fossil sources from throughout the geological record has thus been established in the secular scientific literature by scientists who assume the standard geological time scale is valid and have no special desire for this result!

In view of the profound significance of these AMS 14C measurements, the ICR Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE) team has undertaken its own AMS 14C analyses of such fossil material.2 The first set of samples consisted of ten coals obtained from the U. S. Department of Energy Coal Sample Bank maintained at the Pennsylvania State University. The ten samples include three coals from the Eocene part of the geological record, three from the Cretaceous, and four from the Pennsylvanian. These samples were analyzed by one of the foremost AMS laboratories in the world. Figure 1 below shows in histogram form the results of these analyses.

These values fall squarely within the range already established in the peer-reviewed radiocarbon literature. When we average our results over each geological interval, we obtain remarkably similar values of 0.26 percent modern carbon (pmc) for Eocene, 0.21 pmc for Cretaceous, and 0.27 pmc for Pennsylvanian. Although the number of samples is small, we observe little difference in 14C level as a function of position in the geological record. This is consistent with the young-earth view that the entire macrofossil record up to the upper Cenozoic is the product of the Genesis Flood and therefore such fossils should share a common 14C age.


Percent Modern Carbon

Applying the uniformitarian approach of extrapolating 14C decay into the indefinite past translates the measured 14C/12C ratios into ages that are on the order of 50,000 years (2-50000/5730 = 0.0024 = 0.24 pmc). However, uniformitarian assumptions are inappropriate when one considers that the Genesis Flood removed vast amounts of living biomass from exchange with the atmosphere—organic material that now forms the earth's vast coal, oil, and oil shale deposits. A conservative estimate for the pre-Flood biomass is 100 times that of today. If one takes as a rough estimate for the total 14C in the biosphere before the cataclysm as 40% of what exists today and assumes a relatively uniform 14C level throughout the pre-Flood atmosphere and biomass, then we might expect a 14C/12C ratio of about 0.4% of today's value in the plants and animals at the onset of the Flood. With this more realistic pre-Flood 14C/12C ratio, we find that a value of 0.24 pmc corresponds to an age of only 4200 years (0.004 x 2-4200/5730 = 0.0024 = 0.24 pmc). Even though these estimates are rough, they illustrate the crucial importance of accounting for effects of the Flood cataclysm when translating a 14C/12C ratio into an actual age.

Percent Modern Carbon

Some readers at this point may be asking, how does one then account for the tens of millions and hundreds of millions of years that other radioisotope methods yield for the fossil record? Most of the other RATE projects address this important issue. Equally as persuasive as the 14C data is evidence from RATE measurements of the diffusion rate of Helium in zircon crystals that demonstrates the rate of nuclear decay of Uranium into Lead and Helium has been dramatically higher in the past and the uniformitarian assumption of a constant rate of decay is wrong.3 Another RATE project documents the existence of abundant Polonium radiohalos in granitic rocks that crystallized during the Flood and further demonstrates that the uniformitarian assumption of constant decay rates is incorrect.4 Another RATE project provides clues for why the 14C decay rate apparently was minimally affected during episodes of rapid decay of isotopes with long half-lives.5

The bottom line of this research is that the case is now extremely compelling that the fossil record was produced just a few thousand years ago by the global Flood cataclysm. The evidence that reveals that macroevolution as an explanation for the origin of life on earth can therefore no longer be rationally defended.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 441-449 next last
To: narby
You know, it's a funny thing you mention that. My son can probably tell you more about evolution and darwin than most kids in public school older than he is. The difference is that he has seen both sides and he sees how idiotic evolution is. Many kids in public schools only see one side and they are persuaded that evolution is true only because they have not been grounded and rooted in what God has to say.
I appreciate your name calling of good men to not be addressed to me please. The charlitans are the ones who try to blend two completely different world views. You can't be on both sides of the fence and in 100 years from now, how many people will have lost their faith in God to a false religion of evolution after it becomes the "flat earth" joke of the century.
121 posted on 09/25/2003 4:23:43 PM PDT by goodseedhomeschool (returned) (If history has shown us anything, darwinism/evolution is seriously wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
I guess some creatures missed the Ark.

In promoting the idea that God made the earth appear old, you also
promote the idea that He is a liar.

But then you may mean something else entirely, it's hard to tell.

122 posted on 09/25/2003 4:24:52 PM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
"the earlier method was subject to considerable "noise" from cosmic rays"


Did you read this article cause they talk about how this new method reduces this noise, hence the 90,000 year outer limit now. You are a very hostile person.
123 posted on 09/25/2003 4:24:52 PM PDT by MontanaBeth (USA-its enemies are my enemies-foreign or domestic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool (returned)
Actually, they did not need to herd the animals.

Ok, fair enough. Although, I don't see where it says that in the King James account.

God called them in and GOD closed the door of the ark. I suppose God had His hand in it the whole way.

There's still the question of the kangaroos and koala bears. How did they get into the ark? Did they swim? I'm serious. That's a pretty long stretch for them to come on short notice and without transport. And afterwards, how did Noah distribute the kangaroos and koalas, new world monkeys and old world monkeys, American bison and African buffalo, European squirrel and North American? Did he sort of just pull up to this place or that and say "this is your stop- Wooly mammoths head north, African elephants south, Indian Elephants follow the spice trail?"

That's something that's always vexed me. What point to the African elephant in India and vice versa and to the wooly mammoth? Different characteristics obviously useful in different terrains. Noah would've had to wait for the Indian elephant to travel great distances and show up at the ark. Also for the wooly mammoth. If it were a baby when it started, it wouldn't be a juvenile by the time it reached where ever Noah was- if they survived the journey (just ask Hannibal). Something about this timeline is highly suspect and it doesn't take any scientific instruments to see that- just a little real world experience. How long does it take a kangaroo to get from Australia to the Middle East region?

124 posted on 09/25/2003 4:25:25 PM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
The above quote is another way of saying, "Noise floor from contamination."

We ain't talking a "little noise"

From article (again); there still remained a significant level of 14C—typically about 100 times the ultimate sensitivity of the instrument—in samples that should have been utterly "14C-dead," including many from the deeper levels of the fossil-bearing part of the geological record.2

125 posted on 09/25/2003 4:27:43 PM PDT by HalfFull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
In the days of Peleg the earth was divided.
126 posted on 09/25/2003 4:28:15 PM PDT by goodseedhomeschool (returned) (If history has shown us anything, darwinism/evolution is seriously wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
http://www.gcsechemistry.com/prad23.htm

C14 is only useful for actual remains. Once minerals have replaced the actual sample with a cast or impression [i.e. the specimen is fossilized], other methods of dating must be used.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html

The article cites data claiming that C14 can be detected as far back as 1.5MYA. I've never heard of it going back that far, but still, once the actual specimen has been replaced, C14 is no longer an option.

Some may consider acceptance of evolution to be a concession that all existence is some sort of accident. That is not necessarily the case. Another way of looking at it is by understanding how life develops is to more fully appreciate the grace of the Almighty.

Some say if one doesn't believe [that the Earth is 6,000 years old and that every living thing has always been as they are now] one is a heretic. That is the same as saying that if one doesn't believe that health is regulated by manipulating the four elements [earth, wind, fire, water], one is a heretic.

The more that I learn about astrophysics, nuclear structure, biology, geology and the development of life on earth, the more I'm in awe of the greatness of the Almighty.

Are you looking for proof of the Almighty's existence? Look into the face of a little girl. Such a creature does not exist by accident.
127 posted on 09/25/2003 4:28:20 PM PDT by walford (I don't relish telling you that the emperor is wearing no clothes. It has to be done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool (returned)
LittleJoe, the bible is being attacked every day. Kids are losing their faith all the time to what I consider to be a lie (evolution), don't you see why we feel it needs to be defended?

Why not tell them the truth? The Bible is an ancient book dedicated to peace and justice. What errors it contains, if any, are the result of interpretation. Some things are a mystery to us. Maybe God enjoys a good mystery.

I think the problem of kids losing their faith has more to do with the loss of our family culture than evolution.

If the family bond is strong, kids will tend to follow the belief of their parents. Weak family = weak kids.
128 posted on 09/25/2003 4:29:01 PM PDT by LittleJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: MontanaBeth
The switch in techniques does not address the issues that I raise at all. I said nothing about cosmic rays, although that probably remains a minor problem as well.

I merely noted an incongruity in your post. No real geologist would mention carbon dating as a source for the age of the earth. I do not speculate on how this happened.
129 posted on 09/25/2003 4:29:17 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
I look forward to asking God fine details when I get to heaven.
130 posted on 09/25/2003 4:29:26 PM PDT by goodseedhomeschool (returned) (If history has shown us anything, darwinism/evolution is seriously wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool (returned)
Oh good gawd, and you homeschool?
131 posted on 09/25/2003 4:29:41 PM PDT by LisaAnne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I'm surprised the two geologists you claim to have worked for didn't mention how carbon dating works and how little relation it bears to the age of the earth.

Recommend you take off the blinders...we ain't talking about the "age of the earth", but the age of fossils that are supposed to be millions of years old.

132 posted on 09/25/2003 4:29:44 PM PDT by HalfFull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool (returned)
The difference is that he has seen both sides and he sees how idiotic evolution is.

So, you're risking that someday he might see the rest of the mountain of evidence for evolution, and lose is faith in God entirely.

If you could read Genesis, and see that there is no contradiction between it and evolution, then there would be no risk, and your son would always live a faithful life.

The creationist argument has done more damage to faith than any other theology. It is wrecking the church.

133 posted on 09/25/2003 4:29:50 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
"I'm surprised the two geologists you claimed to work for"


Not more surprised then me, since I never made that claim. I a rock hound and do some home study of geology.
134 posted on 09/25/2003 4:30:40 PM PDT by MontanaBeth (USA-its enemies are my enemies-foreign or domestic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Tac12
You should look at the overall picture: everything fits nice and consistently, universe is 15 billion years old, earth around 5 billion years, plenty of time for evolution to work its way from microbes to people. I really do not see how you can still think evolution is wrong when one sees how all plants and animals share the same DNA structure, microbes evolve by mutations and big parts of the evolution chain preserved in rocks.

I believe you win the silliest post award. Did you get that time out of a farmer's almanac. I got some fly's in my house I was wondering how many seasons it'd be before I got me some elephants. You think 30 days is more than enough, cause there's shore to be a frost a'comin

135 posted on 09/25/2003 4:31:02 PM PDT by PropheticZero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: LittleJoe
The bible to me is as alive today as it was in the beginning. The real reason kids and adults are losing faith is a culmination of attacks by satan. he uses many avenues. I do think evolution is but only one of many. Liberalism is another one. The list is long. The important thing is to do our best to raise them the way God would have us do so. We can only do our best.
136 posted on 09/25/2003 4:33:08 PM PDT by goodseedhomeschool (returned) (If history has shown us anything, darwinism/evolution is seriously wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
Recommend you take off the blinders...we ain't talking about the "age of the earth", but the age of fossils that are supposed to be millions of years old.

You aren't dating the fossils, you're dating the rocks. But you're deliberately using the wrong tool for old rock because any measurement that makes sense blows your ideas out of the water.

137 posted on 09/25/2003 4:33:23 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: walford
The article cites data claiming that C14 can be detected as far back as 1.5MYA. I've never heard of it going back that far, but still, once the actual specimen has been replaced, C14 is no longer an option.

Not all fossils are petrofied. Many are bones, etc., where c14 can be measured (if any remains)

Are you looking for proof of the Almighty's existence?

No, not at all...I know He exists.

138 posted on 09/25/2003 4:34:11 PM PDT by HalfFull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: LisaAnne
Embarrassing, isn't it?
139 posted on 09/25/2003 4:34:16 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull

Insults...just as I would expect. That you can't refute the findings and have to resort to the usual insults is typical. Ho-hum.

It might be more amusing if it was only just a little less sad.


140 posted on 09/25/2003 4:34:41 PM PDT by AnnaZ (:: http://www.radiofreerepublic.com :: Hi-Fi FReepin' ::)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 441-449 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson