God and carbon dating
It is important, as well, to obtain multiple samples at different places on an object and then use statistical methods determine a reasonable range of ages.Yet, even with ideal conditions, carbon-dating results can be highly erroneous or unexpected.Here a new dating method has changed by 1,000 years the earliest accepted date of Mayan civilization. Radiometric dating methods (those measuring geologic time by rate of radioactive decay) have been used to date formations that could be associated with Noah’s Flood.These dates supposedly prove these formations are millions of years old rather than thousands.Sometimes, erroneous results in Carbon dating remain inexplicable.In most cases, however, adequate reasons for improbable dates are discovered.Yet we find that different methods can yield radically different results.
It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be.For example, dating living mollusks by the carbon-14 method often yields clearly errant results—for instance, finding the mollusks to be up to 2,300 years old (“Radiocarbon Dating: Fictitious Results With Mollusk Shells,” , Vol. Archaeologist John Mc Ray notes: “Unfortunately, several recent discoveries combine to indicate that carbon 14 is not as valuable as was once hoped: (1) radioactive carbon atoms may not have existed in the earth’s atmosphere before 2000 B.C.; (2) the natural concentration of carbon 14 in the atmosphere has varied in certain periods, and (3) there is a high probability of sample contamination” ( , 1991, p. Recently a new method—accelerator mass spectrometry—has been used to date ancient items.This method has given a different date than previously accepted for the earliest Mayan civilization.“The oldest known Maya turns out to be younger than archaeologists originally believed.