12 3 dating with radioactivity
12 3 dating with radioactivity - Bob shedd from boston ma adult dating profile page
We will deal with carbon dating first and then with the other dating methods.
The isotope concentrations can be measured very accurately, but isotope concentrations are not dates.Since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism (see Noah's Flood…, How did animals get from the Ark to isolated places? ), fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give radiocarbon ages older than they really are.In summary, the carbon-14 method, when corrected for the effects of the flood, can give useful results, but needs to be applied carefully.Clearly, such huge time periods cannot be fitted into the Bible without compromising what the Bible says about the goodness of God and the origin of sin, death and suffering—the reason Jesus came into the world (See Six Days? He said, This only makes sense with a time-line beginning with the creation week thousands of years ago.It makes no sense at all if man appeared at the end of billions of years.That is, they take up less than would be expected and so they test older than they really are.
Furthermore, different types of plants discriminate differently.Overall, the energy of the Earth's magnetic field has been decreasing, so more C is being produced now than in the past.This will make old things look older than they really are.When a “date” differs from that expected, researchers readily invent excuses for rejecting the result.The common application of such posterior reasoning shows that radiometric dating has serious problems.Unless this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages.