Replies

Thus, radiocarbon dating is only accurate up to 3,500 years.

The argument you are repeating is that radiocarbon dating only is accurate up to 3,500 years because the global flood throws things off earlier than that date.

That might be accurate if there was any scientific evidence of a global flood. There is not.

For the lurkers

We have overlapping tree-ring sequences going back some 12,600 years now. These are used to calibrate the radiocarbon dates. For most of that sequence the tree-rings have been dated every ten years. That is how the fluctuations of ¹⁴C in the atmosphere are accounted for. The trees used are standing dead bristlecone pines in the White Mountains of southern California. They live in an environment which produces only one ring per year. These rings can be cross-checked against historic volcanos, which produced worldwide climatic changes. This allows the rings to be matched with historic volcanic events for over 3,500 years (see the link below).

Unfortunately folks who just have to have a young earth and a global flood will not believe any scientific evidence to the contrary, and make up the most ridiculous "what ifs" to try to argue away those inconvenient facts. Some of the posts on this thread are prime examples of this.

Here are some good links on radiocarbon dating:

ReligiousTolerance.org Carbon-14 Dating (C-14): Beliefs of New-Earth Creationists
Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
This site, BiblicalChronologist.org has a series of good articles on radiocarbon dating.

Are tree-ring chronologies reliable? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
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?

Tree Ring and C14 Dating
Radiocarbon WEB-info Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Waikato, New Zealand.
Radiocarbon -- full text of issues, 1959-2003.

For the lurkers, the tree dating is also based on conjecture and assumptions.

The argument you are repeating is that radiocarbon dating only is accurate up to 3,500 years because the global flood throws things off earlier than that date. That might be accurate if there was any scientific evidence of a global flood. There is not.

We have as much real evidence for a global Flood as we do for Evolution!