Creationist arguments against radiocarbon dating Free sexy two way video chat
These techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in radioactive decay chains.For example, potassium-40 decays to argon-40; uranium-238 decays to lead-206 via other elements like radium; uranium-235 decays to lead-207; rubidium-87 decays to strontium-87; etc.So, we have a “clock” which starts ticking the moment something dies.Obviously, this works only for things which were once living.We will deal with carbon dating first and then with the other dating methods.
A stronger magnetic field deflects more cosmic rays away from the Earth.
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.
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.