How Far Back Can We Measure Dates? Part III

Continuing with the previous two posts regarding the problems and techniques of Carbon-14 dating of specimens, and in particular how labs compensate for variances, such as pre- and post-Flood specimens. 

Green represents the Carbon-14 in the atmosphere. Prior to the Flood, it was building up from the carbon cycle, being diluted by the Carbon-12 from the vast forests; after the Flood, there was less Carbon 12 and the Carbon-14 buildup was increased, providing more Carbon-14 in the atmosphere because of the deforestation of the Flood, thus skewing the dating of specimens both before and after the Flood
    In most cases, a pre-Flood specimen is considered no different to archaeologists in measuring tests by labs than a post-Flood specimen, since scientists do not accept that there was a Flood, and certainly do not have measuring devices calibrated to take that into account. Besides, how would any scientist even know if the specimen was pre- or post-Flood to being with? However, keeping with a pre-Flood specimen for purposes of example, it would be given the same start number as a post-Flood specimen, yet, when comparing the results, one would require a multiplication of four, when in reality it should be one—meaning, it would be judged to be four half-lives or roughly 22,920 years old, when it should be measured against one half-life, or 5,730 years old. There is no way for the lab to know this or to account for it—they simply follow the program designed that ignores any Flood possibility.
    Stated differently, which has been covered before in this series and in previous posts on the subject, the assumption—which again is a mighty big assumption—in Carbon-14 dating, but rarely acknowledged, is that the ratio of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12 in the atmosphere before the industrial revolution has always been the same—about one in a trillion. This assumption, which cannot be measured nor validated, is one of the tenets that drives radiocarbon dating, but in reality, that ratio of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12 in the atmosphere before the Industrial Revolution may have been and probably was quite different.

Fossilized polystrate (single organism extending through more than one geological stratum) trees buried in a standing position (while still living) deep in the strata are found all over the world in multiple layers that science claims took millions of years to deposit, would have toppled during that time--their standing position in such manner shows they were died and buried almost immediately
    For example, a worldwide Flood would overrun and bury pre-Flood forests. Afterward, less carbon would be available to enter the atmosphere from decaying vegetation. With less Carbon-12 to dilute the Carbon-14 continually forming from nitrogen in the upper atmosphere, the ratio of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12 in the atmosphere would increase. This means, that if the atmosphere's ratio of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12 has doubled since the flood and this was not figured into the results, radiocarbon ages of things living soon after the flood would appear to be one half-life older (or 5,730 years) than their true ages. If that ratio quadrupled, organic remains would appear 11,460 (2 x 5,730) years older, etc. Therefore, a “radiocarbon year” would not correspond to an actual year and the dating results would give an age many thousands of years different than the actual age of the specimen.

As stated earlier, recent measurements show that the ratio of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12 has been building up in the atmosphere. However, for the last 3,500 years, the increase in the ratio has been extremely slight. In fact, radiocarbon dating of vertical sequences of organic-rich layers at 714 locations worldwide has consistently shown a surprising result—radiocarbon ages do not increase steadily with depth, as one might expect, instead, they increase at an accelerating rate.
    In other words, the concentration of Carbon-14 is unexpectedly low in the lower organic layers. As one moves to higher and higher layers, this concentration increases, but at a decreasing rate.
    The age is calculated by laboratories that count the decay rate of the radioactive isotope of carbon, which has a nucleus containing six protons and eight neutrons, as the basis for radiocarbon dating. Carbon-14 was first discovered in 1940 by Martin Kamen and Sam Ruben at the University of California Radiation Laboratory in Berkeley, though its existence had been suggested as early as 1934 by Franz Kurie.
    The dating method uses Carbon-14 to determine the age of carbonaceous materials up to a claimed age of about 60,000 years. This is apparently done through measurement in a lab of the energy emission rates, with the disintegration rates determined through knowledge of the average beta-ray energy emitted per disintegration through an extrapolation chamber measuring the emission of a Carbon-14 sample combined with the average energy per disintegration from beta-ray spectrometer measurements and the value for the half-life of Carbon-14 of 5,900 years, plus or minus 250 years. Using the number of Carbon-14 atoms per gram the half-life is determined.
    Several laboratories in the world are now equipped to perform a much improved radiocarbon dating procedure. Using atomic accelerators, a specimen's Carbon-14 atoms can now be actually counted, giving a more precise radiocarbon date with even smaller samples. The standard, but less accurate, radiocarbon dating technique only counts the rare disintegrations of Carbon-14 atoms, which are sometimes confused with other types of disintegrations.
    One of the interesting things is that this new atomic accelerator technique has consistently detected at least small amounts of Carbon-14 in every organic specimen—even materials that evolutionists claim are millions of years old, such as coal—which, based upon its millions of years old age, should not have any Carbon-14 in it at all! This small, consistent amount is found so often among various specimens that contamination can most likely be ruled out. Ancient human skeletons, when dated by this new “accelerator mass spectrometer” technique, give surprisingly recent dates. In one study of eleven sets of ancient human bones, all were dated at about 5,000 radiocarbon years or less—meaning to about 3,000 B.C.

Radiocarbon dating of supposedly very ancient bones should provide valuable information. Yet such testing is rare because researchers believe there would be no Carbon-14 found in the bones, and they do not normally waste money on a technique that destroys their specimen and provides no specific age. Therefore, most researchers do not radiocarbon date any organic specimen they think is older than 100,000 years, even if it still contains carbon. They believe that all carbon-14 that was once in anything older than 100,000 radiocarbon years would have decayed; its age could not be determined. However, if a bone an evolutionist thinks is a million years old contains any detectable carbon-14, the bone wold obviously be less than 100,000 radiocarbon years.
    In fact, in blind radiocarbon tests (where the lab does not know the age of the specimen), bones or other organic remains that contain enough carbon and are believed by evolutionists to be older than 100,000 years have been shown to be relatively young in such tests. This prediction, first published in the 6th Edition (1995), p. 157, has now been confirmed.
    Very precise measurements now show that most fossils—regardless of presumed “geologic age”—have roughly the same ratio of Carbon-14 to Carbon-12. (This includes fossil fuels: coal, oil, and methane.) Therefore, these specimens must have been living at about the same time—less than 100,000 years ago. Because almost all fossils are preserved in water deposited sediments, all this former life was probably buried in a fairly recent, gigantic flood.
    Radiocarbon dating is becoming increasingly important in interpreting the past. However, one must understand how it works and especially how a flood affected radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon ages less than 3,500 years are probably accurate. Ages around 40,000 radiocarbon years, which are typical of coal, have much younger true dates—near the time of the flood, roughly 5,000 years ago.
(See the next post, “How Far Back Can We Measure Dates? Part IV,” to see how dating techniques of Carbon-14 have skewed our understanding of the past and its age)