There are all sorts of problems with most forms of radiocarbon and other forms of radiometric dating. The methods themselves are based on assumptions routed in evolution. Different asusmptions arrive at different results. For example, rocks and debris at Mt. St. Helens, which we know to be only 25 years old have been dated to be thousands and even millions of years old.
There are all sorts of problems with most forms of radiocarbon and other forms of radiometric dating. The methods themselves are based on assumptions routed in evolution. Different asusmptions arrive at different results. For example, rocks and debris at Mt. St. Helens, which we know to be only 25 years old have been dated to be thousands and even millions of years old.
Dating Methods FAQ
What about carbon dating?
Dating in conflict Which ‘age’ will you trust?
The Radiometric Dating Game
I am familiar with radiocarbon dating and with those websites. I have reviewed them carefully and they are, collectively, nonsense. Every time I defend radiocarbon dating, someone on the other side pastes these links.
Here are a couple of links, all with a religious orientation, which you may find more educational:
ReligiousTolerance.org Carbon-14 Dating (C-14): Beliefs of New-Earth Creationists
The American Scientific Affiliation: Science in Christian Perspective Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
This site, BiblicalChronologist.org has a series of good articles on radiocarbon dating.
How does the radiocarbon dating method work? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
How precise is radiocarbon dating?
Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?
Has radiocarbon dating been invalidated by unreasonable results?
You just stepped in it big time. I'm sure C-man will enlighten you.