Creationists carbon dating wrong
I always was told that science was wrong, carbon dating was inaccurate, etc.I believed it until I went to college and learned about science for myself.
Finally lets say that I found an article that provides the exact arguments that the religious folks use to put down radio carbon dating. Now, given those circumstances, please debunk each of the arguments, in an attempt to shed light on the subject for the unenlightened masses. Please be sure to address each of the 5 arguments one at a time, then we can move to the google scholar articles later.
Lets also say that I read this thread, and then looked at what the arguments against radio carbon dating are.
Lets add that from what I just read on Google Scholar, there are some difficulties with radio carbon dating.
Bare in mind you dont know which side of the fence I sit, if any.
This is just an exersize, using a random article on the internet. First, for carbon-14 dating to be accurate, one must assume the rate of decay of carbon-14 has remained constant over the years.Keep the two parts of your life separate and you should be quite happy.Try to make the two agree and you'll soon be spouting nonsense like the world is only 6000 years old. Libby used false assumptions in reaching his conclusions. It suffices to know: 1) The radiocarbon volume from the moment of the objects departure from the exchange reservoir. The real activity of ancient specimens may alter from the average value for numerous reasons, including, but not at all limited to: Cosmic ray intensity changes, a theoretical estimation shows a 20% deviation range.It divides by HALF its previous amount based at a CONSTANT rate. There are other materials that can be used, however. Great post and I can tell that you do have a brain!