Archaeology

Carbon-14 and Genesis 1: "In the Beginning"

If you had no axe to grind—no preconceived turf to defend—what would you conclude from the plain reading of the evidence? There is no reason for the student of the Scriptures to squirm when the discussion of the age of the earth and its universe arises. It’s time for the redeemed to review the information, stake out their position, and defend the faith.
Recommend To A Friend
Audio Options: MP3

Carbon-14 and Genesis 1: "In the Beginning"

Article#: 1547

What a mess: This world is such a mess and it will become progressively worse until it’s sad, final, and very abrupt demise.  Expect wars and rumors of war, civil unrest, thieves of all stripes—from the dark-of-night to smiling white collars—accelerating drug and alcohol addictions, earthquakes and storms raging, moral decadence where evil becomes good, plummeting IQs, medical pandemics, rampant mental disorders from the cradle to the grave, and so much more.  It’s dark and getting darker—darkness you can feel.  But it’s in the very midst of this gross darkness where the redeemed have been positioned by God to shine and to bear much fruit.  The souls of men trapped in this downward and dark spiral yearn for a way of escape.  That way is Jesus Christ and He is the message the redeemed proclaim.  Matthew 4:16-17 speaks of the ministry of the Lord:

16 The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.

17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Have you seen the Light?  Are you ready to vacate the dark downward spiral?  Today can be your day of salvation.  Today can be your opportunity to participate in the greatest miracle of all time.  Today, you can be born again.  Click onto “Further With Jesus” for childlike instructions and immediate entry into the Kingdom of God. NOW FOR TODAY’S SUBJECT.

GOD SAID, Genesis 1:1:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

GOD SAID, Exodus 20:11:

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

GOD SAID, Proverbs 30:6:

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

MAN SAID: Anyone with just a smidgen of learning knows the universe and the earth are billions of years old!  No educated person would embrace creationists and their young-earth foolishness. 

Now THE RECORD:  If you had no axe to grind—no preconceived turf to defend—what would you conclude from the plain reading of the evidence?  What would you conclude from:

  • Hundreds of ancient and not-so ancient records that show man and dinosaurs living side-by-side?
  • Soft tissue discovered in dinosaur bones that could not possibly have existed for 65 million-plus years?
  • mtDNA Eve that science says is the mother of all living? 
  • Y-chromosome Adam that science says is the father of all living? 
  • Fish fossils found on nearly every mountain peak and nearly 500 societal records that speak of a devastating flood? 
  • The amazing intricacies of all living, interdependent organisms and the precisely fine-tuned universe that demands intelligent design?

What would be your conclusion?  Would the God of the Bible who fully explains these findings gain credibility in your mind? 

At GodSaidManSaid, we are not scientists, archaeologists, geologists, or historians—we are not in any academic field.  We are born-again aggregators.  We gather information for your review that confirms the inerrancy of God’s Holy Word.  Around 100 of this site’s 760 subjects address the age of the earth and its universe—a subject that carnal academia consistently undermines.  Be of good cheer, saints:  No scientific truth has ever proved the earth and its universe to be billions of years old.  The reason why they can’t prove it is simple.  It’s not true

Foundational information concerning the age of the earth and various scientific techniques, plus some of the latest discoveries, follow.  Could the earth and its universe be just over 6,000 years old like the Bible says?   If the very first verse of the Bible is a fairytale, what confidence should one place in the rest of the text? 

The following paragraphs are from the GodSaidManSaid feature, “Carbon Dating and 2+2=5:”

We received the following email from a visitor to GodSaidManSaid:

Every object—animate or inanimate—contains a form of carbon known as carbon-14.  As the object ages, the amount of carbon-14 it contains decreases.  By measuring the amount of carbon-14 in an object, scientists can conclude the approximate “age” of said object.  This method of age detection is known as carbon dating.  Are the conclusions that scientists have come to, such as rocks aging close to 5 billion years old, false?  Are they the work of the devil? 

Since the very beginning until now, the earth has existed in space for approximately 6,000 years.  The Scriptures, using a generational system, date the earth to the advent of Jesus Christ at approximately 4,000 years.  When you add the years since Christ, we have an earth and a universe just over 6,000 years old, by the Gregorian calendar. 

Man said, due to false theories like evolution and due to erroneous dating systems like carbon-14, potassium-argon, and others, that the earth is billions of years old. 

There were several errors in the writer’s email:

1. The carbon-14 dating procedure is only good on objects that are dead but were once living.  Carbon-14 is absorbed and ingested by all living plants, animals, and humans and only begins to diminish after death.  The carbon-14 dating method measures the decay and converts that decay into years.

2. Rocks, minerals, and fully-mineralized fossils cannot be dated by the “radiocarbon” method.

3. Even ardent proponents of carbon-14 dating know that past 50,000 years, the carbon-14 remaining in a once-living object would be so minute that no reliable measurement could be made.

4. Many scientists doubt carbon-14 dating’s accuracy beyond 3,000 years. 

The writer also asked if the billions of years attributed to the age of the universe is the work of the devil—the answer is yes.  Please note, if your majority-text Holy Bible is the inerrant Words of the Living God—which it purports itself to be and which has been proven a myriad of times—then all statements that are contrary to it are lies.  Lies are the work of the devil.  Jesus Christ was speaking to those who cast off truth in John 8:44:

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

The ridiculous long-ages into the billions of years are not a product of radiocarbon dating.  The two most commonly used methods to date rocks and minerals are the potassium-argon and uranium-lead methods.  As in all the radiometric systems of dating, two familiar, false assumptions are in their equation.  Remember, if your computer says 2+2=5, no matter how scholarly, the math computation will always be incorrect.  The following are the two false assumptions.  The excerpt cited is from the book The World that Perished by John C. Whitcomb:

Many scientists claim to have nearly-infallible methods for determining the age of the earth and its various formations.  But all of these methods are built upon two basic and unprovable assumptions:

1. The assumption of starting point or original condition; and

2. The assumption of a uniform rate of change from that starting point to the present. 

Contrary to the evolutionary paradigm and according to God:

1. The starting point of the universe and all life within in is an abrupt beginning that didn’t take “billions of years” to transpire.  The first man, Adam, for example, is created fully grown and fully mature on the sixth day of creation—approximately 6,000 years ago.  Contrary to evolution’s false assumption, Adam had no evolutionary history.  If you had seen Adam one minute after his creation, not knowing the backstory, you would assume history when there was none. 

2. Contrary to false assumption number two, this world has not experienced a uniform rate of change.  A horrific, worldwide deluge took place over 4,300 years ago which destroyed the atmosphere and life as it was once known.  This tremendous disaster is commonly known as Noah’s Flood

The following statement has been taken from the Anthropological Journal of Canada:

The troubles of the radiocarbon dating method are undeniably deep and serious.  Despite 35 years of technological 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.  Continuing use of the method depends on a “fix-it-as-we-go” approach, allowing for contamination here, fractionation there, and calibration wherever possible.  It should be no surprise, then, that fully half of the dates are rejected.  The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half came to be accepted. 

No matter how “useful” it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results.  There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates.

It is important to keep in mind that dates and ages of most rock strata were assumed—based on evolutionary theory—before radiometric dating was invented.  If the dates measured are contrary to evolution’s preconceived positions, then the date is often rejected. 

The following paragraph was found in a publication titled Contributions to Geology:

In general, dates in the “correct ballpark” are assumed to be correct and are published, but those in disagreement with other data are seldom published nor are discrepancies fully explained.

The dating discrepancies in the radiometric field are daunting.  Example: Wood which was buried in lava flow that formed basalt in Australia was dated by carbon-14 at about 45,000 years old.  The basalt it was found in was measured by the potassium-argon method at 45 million years old.  Potassium-argon said it was a thousand times older than carbon-14. 

The following paragraphs are found in a book authored by Morris and Morris titled Many Infallible Proofs:

As in the case of uranium dating, potassium dating also commonly yields great ages on rocks known to be very young:

The radiogenic argon and helium contents of three basalts erupted into the deep ocean from an active volcano (Kilauea) have been measured.  Ages calculated from these measurements increase with sample depth up to 22 million years for lavas deduced to be recent—it is possible to deduce that these lavas are very young, probably less than 200 years old. 

And again we ask how it is possible to be sure that potassium ages are correct when determined for rocks of unknown age when the same method gives ages 100,000 times too great for rocks whose ages we know! 

Evolutionist F.B. Jueneman, in Industrial Research and Development, stated:

The age of our globe is presently thought to be some 4.5 billion years, based on radio-decay rates of uranium and thorium.  Such “confirmation” may be short-lived, as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily.  In recent years, there has been the horrible realization that radio-decay rates are not as constant as previously thought, nor are they immune to environmental influences.  And this could mean that the atomic clocks are reset during some global disaster, and events which brought the Mesozoic to a close may not be 65 million years ago, but rather within the age and memory of man. 

The following statement is from evolutionist William Stansfield, Ph.D., California Polytech State:

It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be.  Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different (sometimes by hundreds of millions of years. There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological “clock.”  [End of quotes]

In the GodSaidManSaid feature “Radiometric Dating and 6,000 Years (Part Three),” you’ll find the following:

This final installment in the three-part series on radiometric dating and its long-ages displays the sinking sand of evolutionary theory.  In this series, GodSaidManSaid reviews a feature written by renowned geologist Dr. Andrew Snelling, published by Answers magazine in the October-December 2009 issue.  In this feature, titled “Radiometric Dating: Problems with the Assumptions,” Snelling lays out the Achilles’ heel of today’s radiometric dating.  A few paragraphs from the previous features are needed here, and they follow:

In feature one, under the heading of “Assumption 1: Conditions at Time Zero,” Dr. Snelling points out the problem of assumptions and cites a sampling of erroneous dates that assumption produces:

Example #1: Twenty-three-year-old lava from America’s Mt. St. Helens crater, which was observed to form and cool in 1986, posted a calculated age of 350,000 years, or a difference of 15,200 times

Example#2: Mt. Ngauruhoe in New Zealand, with lava flows less than 50 years old, yield “ages” up to 3.5 million years—or 70,000 times older than their observed dates. 

“Assumption 2: No Contamination” also produces ridiculous long-age dating:

Example: Due to obvious contamination issues, New Zealand’s Mt. Ngauruhoe 50-year-old lava flows display “a rubidium-strontium ‘age’ of 133 million years, a samarium-neodymium ‘age’ of 197 million years, and a uranium-lead ‘age’ of 3.908 billion years!”  Using the last number, radiometric dating is 78,160,000 times too high

Dr. Snelling continues with his assessment of evolution’s false assumptions with “Assumption 3: Constant Decay Rate:”

Physicists have carefully measured the radioactive decay rates of parent radioisotopes in laboratories over the last 100 or so years and have found them to be essentially constant (within the measurement error margins).  Furthermore, they have not been able to significantly change these decay rates by heat, pressure, or electrical and magnetic fields. So geologists have assumed these radioactive decay rates have been constant for billions of years. 

However, this is an enormous extrapolation of seven orders of magnitude back through immense spans of unobserved time without any concrete proof that such an extrapolation is credible.  Nevertheless, geologists insist that radioactive decay rates have always been constant, because it makes these radioactive clocks “work!” 

New evidence, however, has recently been discovered that can only be explained by the radioactive decay rates not having been constant in the past.  For example, the radioactive decay of uranium in tiny crystals in a New Mexico granite yields a uranium-lead “age” of 1.5 billion years.  Yet the same uranium decay also produced abundant helium, but only 6,000 years’ worth of that helium was found to have leaked out of the tiny crystals. 

This means that the uranium must have decayed very rapidly over the same 6,000 years that the helium was leaking.  The rate of uranium decay must have been at least 250,000 times faster than today’s measured rate!  For more details, see Don DeYoung’s Thousands…Not Billions[End of quotes]

Several paragraphs from GodSaidManSaid’s “More 6,000-Year-Old Earth” follow:

Ann Gibbons wrote in the January 2, 1998 issue of Science an unsettling article for evolutionists under the heading, “Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock.”

Gibbons reports:

Mitochondrial DNA appears to mutate much faster than expected, prompting new DNA forensics procedures and raising troubling questions about the dating of evolutionary events.  In 1991, Russians exhumed a Siberian grave containing nine skeletons thought to be the remains of the last Russian tsar, Nicholas II, and his family and retinue, who were shot by firing squad in 1918.  But two bodies were missing, so no one could be absolutely certain of the remains.  And DNA testing done in 1992—expected to settle the issue quickly—instead raised a new mystery.

The mystery concerned the dates relating to the clock rate.  It appears that mutations occur at a much more rapid rate than had been imagined.  Although there seems to be considerable debate about the cause of the faster rate, the faster rate has been verified by independent investigations. 

Again, Gibbons says:

Regardless of the cause, evolutionists are most concerned about the effect of a faster mutation rate.  For example, researchers have calculated that the “mitochondrial Eve”—the woman whose mtDNA was ancestral to that in all living people—lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa.  Using the new clock, she  would be a mere 6,000 years old.  [End of quotes]

Since that feature was published 17 years ago, situations have not improved. 

In May of 1980, a volcanic eruption took place that again has long-age evolutionists scrambling.  A few paragraphs from geologist Andrew Snelling published in the April/June 2015 issue of Answers magazine follow:

The volcanic blast of May 18, 1980, traveling at an initial speed of over 650 miles per hour (300m/sec.), destroyed the forests in the surrounding 230 square miles (600 km2) within ten minutes!  Douglas firs as tall as 200 feet (61 m) were instantly stripped of their branches and snapped like toothpicks. 

The enormous log mat floating on Spirit Lake lost its bark and branches, rubbed off by the abrasive action of wind and waves.  Scuba investigators of the lake bottom subsequently revealed that sheets of bark intermingled with volcanic sediments had formed a layer of peat more than 3 feet (1 m) thick. Together with broken branches and root materials, the sheets of bark gave the peat a coarse texture and a layered appearance.  This “Spirit Lake peat” resembles, both compositionally and texturally, certain coal beds of the eastern United States. 

The “Spirit Lake peat” accumulated in just five years.  The Spirit lake peat is texturally and compositionally similar to the coarse content of coal beds, which secular geologists believe require many thousands of years to accumulate. 

Many geologists claim that coal beds formed by the very slow accumulation of organic material in vast swamps where the plants grew in place.  By slow accumulation, they estimate about 1,000 years was required to form each inch of coal.  

The lesson from Spirit Lake is that coal beds can and do form rapidly, due to catastrophic destruction of forests, not the slow and gradual growth of plants in swamps.  The Flood would have destroyed the earth’s forests in a matter of weeks, and the floating, jostling logs would produce bark that then sank to form most of the earth’s coal layers. 

In June of 1992, a large sample was collected from the surface of one of the last lava flows, probably from the year 1986.  Samples were sent to a laboratory in 1996 to be radiometrically dated using the potassium-argon method.  This method measures the amount of argon atoms that presumably formed from the radioactive decay of potassium atoms in the lava after it cooled.  The rock was a mere ten years old, but the potassium-argon “clock” dated the rock at 350,000 years old, and minerals within it dated at up to 2.4 million years old. 

These results are consistent with many reports in the literature of numerous other lava samples from around the world that have similarly yielded highly erroneous potassium-argon ages.  This unquestionably demonstrates that the radioactive dating methods are fraught with difficulties that render them unreliable. 

If the assumptions are faulty, they can produce incorrect dates.  So when we see old dates that contradict the Biblical timeframe, we can be certain they are based on mistaken assumptions and must be radically adjusted.  [End of quotes]

They are a little late to the party, but nevertheless, they are arriving.  The headline in the August 22, 2015 feature of Science News reads, “Carbon dating could soon mislead.”   A few excerpts follow:

The accuracy of carbon dating may soon be a thing of the past. 

Fossil fuel emissions threaten the method’s ability to definitively pinpoint the age of organic materials, new research suggests.  The extra carbon flooding the atmosphere dilutes the relative number of radioactive carbon atoms that are vital to the dating method.  By 2050, the age of fresh organic material will appear indistinguishable from material created in AD 1050, predicts atmospheric scientist Heather Graven of Imperial College London.  Her work appears online July 20 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 

Researchers should investigate alternative dating methods, says geochemist Kevin Uno of Columbia University.  “It’s going to be a game of creativity.”  [End of quotes]

Another suggested headline for this feature could be “Carbon dating does mislead.” 

There is no reason for the student of the Scriptures to squirm when the discussion of the age of the earth and its universe arises.  It’s time for the redeemed to review the information, stake out their position, and defend the faith.  God’s Word, from the very first verse, is “true and righteous altogether.” 

GOD SAID, Genesis 1:1:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

GOD SAID, Exodus 20:11:

For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

GOD SAID, Proverbs 30:6:

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

MAN SAID: Anyone with just a smidgen of learning knows the universe and the earth are billions of years old!  No educated person would embrace creationists and their young-earth foolishness. 

Now you have THE RECORD.

 

References:

Authorized King James Version

GodSaidManSaid, “Carbon Dating and 2+2=5

GodSaidManSaid, “Foolishness Built Upon Foolishness Equals Nothing

GodSaidManSaid, “More 6,000-Year-Old Earth

GodSaidManSaid, “Radiometric Dating and 6,000 Years (Part Three)

Sumner, T., “Carbon Dating Could Soon Mislead,” Science News, August 22, 2015

Visits: 3044