Friday, November 1, 2019

Does C-14 Dating Support Evolution?


In today's article we are going to be taking a look at the subject of C-14 dating to find out if it supports an old earth. Evolutionary scientist like to point out that Carbon 14 proves that the earth isn't just around 6000 years old like many bible believing Christians believe but much older because C-14 dating gives ages in the tens of thousands of years. However as I'm going to show C-14 dating actually supports the biblical worldview of a young earth and flat out debunks evolution.



Due to the accelerated rate of decay of C 14 Scientists only get ages in the thousands of years range, this is because C-14 changes into nitrogen 14. So how do we get C-14 in samples?Well,  C-14 is continually being supplemented to our atmosphere by cosmic rays which collide with atoms. Then c 14 fuses with the oxygen in earth's atmosphere to form carbon dioxide, it should be noted that C-12 also fuses with oxygen to get carbon dioxide too.

Then we have the plants absorbing the carbon dioxide, which are in turn consumed by animals and people. It turns out that every thing that is alive should possess the same ratio of c 14 and c 12  as in the air, but once a creature dies it stops receiving C 14. This is when the dating process starts. Scientist use an item called a accelerator mass spectrometer in order to find out the ratio of c 14 to c 12.  The half life of C-14 is 5,730 years.

The living thing ratio of c 14 to c 12 is 1 to 1 trillion atoms. This ratio of C-14 decreases in dead things. The Evolutionary Scientist suppose that the 1 to 1 trillion ratio has never changed. If this assumption is correct the AMS dating method is accurate up to approximately 80,000 years. The question is has it always be the same or what could cause this ratio to change?

Let's say the yielding amount of C 14 in the atmosphere is not equivalent to the rate of removal, it would cause the ratio to change. Another way to put it is that the ratio of  c 14 to c 12 wouldn't be a constant. This makes knowing the starting number of carbon 14 in a sample very challenging or even impossible to  determine precisely.

Another thing to note is that the founder of the c 14 dating method did assume the ratio to be constant and computed that it would take 30,000 years for the C-14 in our atmosphere to reach equilibrium. This is one problem for evolution since the rate hasn't reached equilibrium yet. This is known because the SPR (specific production rate) of c 14 is known to be 18.8 atoms per gram of total carbon per minute, however the SDR (specific decay rate) is known to be just 16.1 disintegration's per gram per minute, proving that it hasn't reached equilibrium.


Another fact to add to this calculation is that the magnetic field was stronger in the past which would then result in fewer cosmic rays entering our atmosphere. This would result in less c 14 forming in the past. This would cause the dates from using the c 14 method to erroneously assume that more c 14 had decomposed out of a sample than what has actually happened.


This is why C-14 dating gives older dates than the specimen's true age. The flood as recorded in the book of Genesis would have buried huge amounts of carbon from living creatures which formed the fossil fuels of the present. We see by the sheer amount of fossil fuels today that they indicate a exceedingly bigger quantity of vegetation before the flood than what we have today. This means that the earth's biosphere could have had five hundred times the amount of carbon in living organisms than experienced today. 


What does that mean? It would further dilute the quantity of c 14 and cause the ratio of c 14 to c 12  to be alot smaller than the present, maybe even by 1/500. The ages we get from C-14 dating today doesn't take into account of the magnetic field's decay or the flood. So we can see that all guesses for an organism's age before the flood using c 14 will result in much older dates than the actual age, perhaps by a factor of ten. 


Now I want to briefly mention the 8 year project which started in 1997, that investigated earth's age; the name of the group was called RATE. They took samples from 10 different coal layers according to evolutionist of coarse, which was said to represent different periods of time in the geologic column. They also collected samples from Major coal fields throughout the USA. 

Are you ready for the results? These samples which were millions to 100's of millions of years old based on the evolution timeline, all had perceptible amounts of c 14 present. It should also be noted that they took precautions in order to eliminate any possibility of contamination. So why is this significant? Well there should be no detectable C 14 after 100,000 years. The average age for these 3 time periods according to C-14 estimates was approximately 50,000 years, however that would only be around 5,000 years with the pre flood ratio. 

In regards to contamination of samples, It turns out that if coal absorbed it's own body weight in modern air this would only raise the c-14 by .0001 pmc. However we find samples with .2 and .4 pmc. If you want to argue that there are uranium deposits underground it should be noted that they have a half life of 4.5 billion years. This would cause a loss of C-14 of 800,000 faster than you would gain.

One last amazing fact before I close it turns out that c 14 has been found in fossils throughout all layers of the geologic column (including dinosaurs), as well as in coal, diamonds, and meteorites. It is important to note that the presence of c-14 in diamonds proves that they aren't millions of years old since the highly unlikely chance that they are contaminated due to the fact that they are so dense/hard. 

So in conclusion we find out that C-14 dating is an ally to the biblical christian world view and flat out refutes the idea of an old earth. It should also be noted that the ages that C-14 gives aren't "exact" ages but rather ages "up to" so even if the sample's age is 50,000 according to C-14, this only means that the sample can be that old according to evolutionary scientist and not it's definite age.  

References:

https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/doesnt-carbon-14-dating-disprove-the-bible/

Genesis week ep 5 season 5

 Thanks for Reading Please Share!!!!

No comments:

Post a Comment