Carbon dating is complete nonsense
This nullifies the carbon-14 method as well as demonstrating that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. One suspects that the scientific world would not be using the carbon-14 method if it were so obviously flawed.Could it be that the whole scientific community has missed this point, or is it another case of creationist daydreaming?
The water level just sits there even though the hose is going full blast.The following material has been taken from a sheet entitled Several Faulty Assumptions Are Used in all Radiometric Dating Methods.Carbon 14 is used for this example:, which was put out by Dr. is presently only 1/3 of the way to an equilibrium value which will be reached in 30,000 years. Knowing how faulty creationist "facts" can be, let's do a little research of our own.That is, the equilibrium point should have long since been reached given the present rate of carbon-14 production and the old age of the earth.The next step in Henry Morris' argument was to show that the water level in our barrel analogy was not in equilibrium, that considerably more water was coming in than leaking out.Creationists don't want their readers to be distracted with problems like that -- unless the cat is already out of the bag and something has to be said.
Tree-ring dating (see Topic 27) gives us a wonderful check on the radiocarbon dating method for the last 8000 years.
When the dipole moment is strong, carbon-14 production is suppressed below normal; when it is weak, carbon-14 production is boosted above normal.
What the magnetic field does is to partially shield the earth from cosmic rays which produce carbon-14 high in the atmosphere.
It's a great argument except for one, little thing.
The water is coming out of the hose at a steady rate as our model assumed!
We stick the garden hose in and turn it on full blast.