Carbon Dating and 2+2=5

No matter how scholarly the evaluation, if it is built upon a false assumption, the conclusion will be in error. That brings us to Carbon dating.
Recommend To A Friend
Audio Options: MP3

Carbon Dating and 2+2=5

Article#: 707

A special note: On this website, at the time of this writing, there are nearly 10 hours of streaming audio...basically a complete narration of the written words on Simply get a cup of tea, select the subject category on the navigation panel on your left, then select the subject you're interested in, click on the play or listen button and put up your feet and listen. Plus, every Thursday eve (God willing) a brand new subject is aired. Over and over again it is proven that God is. Thank you for coming.

No matter how articulate and scholarly the evaluation, if it is built upon a false assumption, the conclusion will be in error. If I plug into the computing program of my computer that 2 + 2 equals 5, no matter how scholarly my math, my computations will always be incorrect. That brings us to today's subject.

We received the following e-mail from a visitor to

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. The 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?

GOD SAID in Exodus, Chapter 20, Verse 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.

Since the very beginning until now the earth has existed in space for approximately 6,000 years. See the subject "6,000 Year Old Earth" on this website. The scriptures, using a generational system, date the earth to the advent of Jesus Christ at approximately 4,000 years and when you add the years since Christ, we have an earth and universe just over 6,000 years old.

MAN SAID, because of false theories like evolution and erroneous dating systems like Carbon-14 and Potassium-Argon, etc., that the earth is billions of years old.

Now, THE RECORD. There were several errors in the writer's e-mail.

1. The Carbon 14 dating procedure is only good on objects that are dead...that 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 and 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 to be millions of times, then all statements that are contrary to it are lies and lies are the work of the devil. Jesus Christ was speaking to those who cast off the truth in John, Chapter 8, Verse 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 of into the billions are not a product of radiocarbon dating. The two most commonly used methods to date rocks and minerals are the Potassium-Argon and the 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 and the excerpt cited is from the book titled, 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 on it, is an abrupt beginning that didn't take billions of years to transpire. The first man, Adam, for example, is created fully grown, fully mature, on the sixth day of creation approximately 6,000 years ago. Contrary to evolution's false assumption, Adam had no evolutionary history. See the following subjects on this website:

  • Dinosaurs
  • 6,000 Year Old Earth
  • Neanderthal Man
  • Adam and Eve
  • Man From Dirt
  • All The World Was Once Vegetarian

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 and it was once known. This tremendous disaster is commonly known as Noah's flood. See "Noah's Ark -- Fact or Fiction?" on this website.


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 whenever possible. It should be no surprise, then, that fully half of the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half come 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.

In a publication titled, Contributions to Geology, this paragraph was found:

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 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 age 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 shortlived, as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily. There has been in recent years 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."

Anytime pseudo-science disagrees with God's word, pseudo-science is simply wrong.

GOD SAID that the earth is just over 6,000 years old.

MAN SAID, because of false theories like evolution and erroneous dating systems like Carbon 14 and Potassium-Argon, etc., that the earth is billions of years old.

Now you have THE RECORD.



King James Bible

Libby, W.F., Radiocarbon Dating, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 6th revised edition, 1965) p 11.

Taylor, P.S., Origins Answer Book, Eden Publications, 4th edition, 1992, pp 11-12.

Aardsma, G.A., Radiocarbon and the Genesis Flood (tentative title, manuscript in progress), Santee, CA: Institute for Creation Research, 1991.

Brown, H.R., "Implications of C-14 Age vs. Depth Profile Characteristics," Origins, vol. 15, no. 1 (Loma Linda, CA: Geoscience Research Institute, Loma Linda Univ., 1998).

Whitcomb, J.C., The World That Perished, Baker Publishing, 1999, p 100.

Lee, R.E., "Radiocarbon, Ages In Error," Anthropological Journal of Canada, vol. 19, no. 3, 1981, pp 9, 29.

Morris, J.D., The Young Earth, Master Books, 1998.

Mauger, R.L., "K-Ar Ages of Biotites From Tuffs in Eocene Rocks of the Green River, Washakie, and Uinta Basins, Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado," (University of Wyoming) Contributions to Geology, vol. 15, no. 1 (winter 1977), pp 17-41.

Morris, H.M., That Their Words May Be Used Against Them, Institute For Creation Research, San Diego, CA, 1997.

Snelling, A.A., "Radiometric Dating In Conflict," Creation, 1998, 20 (i): 24-27.

Noble, C.S. and J.J. Naughton, "Deep-Ocean Basalts: Inert Gas Content and Uncertainties in Age Dating," Science, vol. 162 (10-11-68), p 265.

Morris, H.M. and H.M. Morris III, Many Infallible Proofs, Master Books, 1996, p 303.

Jueneman, F.B., "Secular Catastrophism," Industrial Research and Development, June 1982, p 21.

Stansfield, W.D., The Science of Evolution, (N.Y.: Macmillan publishing Co., 1997), p 84.

Visits: 104759