Carbon 14 dating flawed

If the date is old enough (perhaps by an erroneous reading), tree-ring specialists look at ring thicknesses for a way to extend the 'long chronology'. It should be no surprise, then, that fully half of the dates are rejected. God, the Father, sent His only Son to satisfy that judgment for those who believe in Him.This chronology is then used to assure the public that radiocarbon dating has been calibrated by a continuous sequence of tree rings. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half come to be accepted. Jesus, the creator and eternal Son of God, who lived a sinless life, loves us so much that He died for our sins, taking the punishment that we deserve, was buried, and rose from the dead according to the Bible.

The plants use the carbon in the CO2 to make sugar and other food while animals eating the plants ingest the C14 (mixture of stable C12 and radioactive C14).At death, the C14 that it had slowly decays into nitrogen gas.C14 is produced in the upper atmosphere when cosmic radiation interacts with nitrogen gas, converting nitrogen-14 to C14.These C14 atoms combine with oxygen to form carbon dioxide (CO2) gas, which is absorbed by plants.If it wasn’t present initially, then uranium in its purest form must have just suddenly appeared.

Second, it is assumed that within any given sample, no parent or daughter elements ever entered or left the sample.Advocates of the Carbon dating method have turned to "Dendrochronology" (a.k.a.tree-ring dating) to calibrate their timescale (that is, to adjust it to compensate for the C-12 to C-14 ratio fluctuations).However, tree ring specialists have refused to subject their judgments to these statistical tests and would not release their data so others can do these statistical tests" (Walt Brown, In the Beginning, 2001, p. This refusal to submit their work to close scrutiny raises a reasonable concern, especially in light of the apparent circular reasoning employed by the researchers. Despite 35 years of technical refinement and better understanding, the underlying assumptions have been strongly challenged, and warnings are out that radiocarbon may soon find itself in a crisis situation."Wood specimens considered for 'long chronologies' are first radiocarbon dated. Continuing use of the method depends on a 'fix-it-as-we-go' approach, allowing for contamination here, fractionation here, and calibration whenever possible.First, they assume that when the rock was formed only the parent element was present, and there was no daughter element.