Ever hear of carbon dating? Probably not.
Science Magazine (Vol 224, 1984) gives an example of shells from living snails being carbon dated at 27,000 years of age. Sort of casts some doubt on how reliable Cardon dating can be.
Also, According to Dr. Kent Hovind, at least six different radiometric dating methods are available. The assumed age of the sample will dictate which dating method is used because each will give a different result. For example: when dinosaur bones containing carbon are found, they are not carbon dated because the result would be only a few thousand years. Because this would not match the assumed age based on the geologic column, scientists use another method of dating to give an age closer to the desired result. All radiometric results that do not match the pre-assigned ages of the geologic column are discarded” In essence, The bones are dated according to the system that will yield the desired result the scientist wishes, and anything that contradicts this is tossed out.
“Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory.”
- Ronald R. West, Ph.D.
“In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit in with it.”
- H. S. Lipson, professor of physics, University of Manchester, UK
Ever hear of the "flood"? Probably not. If the Bible account of a global flood from a cloud canopy is correct, incidence of solar radiation in antedeluvian times would have been reduced, lowering the fraction of C14 from the ratio expected today. Samples of organisms from that period would date as being far older than they actually are.