Basic
Worldview:
103
Science, the Bible,
and Creation
Origins
- Section Four:
Carbon-14 Problems
Origins - Section One: Introduction
and the Basics
Origins - Section Two: Premature
Dismissals
Origins - Section Two: Application
of the Basics
Origins - Section Three: Creation
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Origin of Life
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Environment for Life 1
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Environment for Life 2
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Another Planet
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Origin of Species
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Speciation Factors
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Speciation Rates
Origins - Section Four: Time and
Age, Redshift
Origins - Section Four: Philosophical
Preference
Origins - Section Four: Cosmological
Model 1
Origins - Section Four: Cosmological
Model 2
Origins - Section Four: Dating Methods,
Perceptions, Basics
Origins - Section Four: Global Flood
Evidence
Origins - Section Four: Relative
Dating
Origins - Section Four: Dating and
Circular Reasoning
Origins - Section Four: The Geologic
Column
Origins - Section Four: Radiometric
Dating Basics
Origins - Section Four: General
Radiometric Problems
Origins - Section Four: Carbon-14
Problems
Origins - Section Four: Remaining
Methods and Decay Rates
Origins - Section Four: Radiometric
Conclusions, Other Methods
Origins - Section Five: Overall
Conclusions, Closing Editorial
Origins - Section Five: List
of Evidences Table
Origins Debate Figures and
Illustrations
Focus
on Critical Evidence: Carbon-14 Dating
At
this point, we have completed the first 3 segments on the
topic of radiometric dating. We have completed our study of
the fundamentals of radiometric dating, our discussion of
the obstacles facing igneous and metamorphic radiometric dating
in general, our examination of the problems facing the prominent
potassium-argon method, and our exploration of the impact
of a global flood on dating igneous and metamorphic rocks.
Consequently, we are now ready to begin our fourth segment,
which is an examination of the radiometric dating method using
carbon-14.
In
terms of basic vocabulary, it is important to note that carbon-14
dating is also called “radiocarbon dating.”
“Prehistoric
People, Placing prehistoric people in time – Radiocarbon dating is sometimes called C-14 dating.” –
Worldbook, Contributor: Alan E. Mann, Ph.D., Professor of
Anthropology, Princeton
University.
“Carbon-14
dating – also
called radiocarbon dating, method of age determination
that depends upon the decay to nitrogen of radiocarbon (carbon-14).”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
It
should also be noted that carbon-14 dating is important to
a variety of significant fields of study, including archeology,
anthropology, oceanography, pedology, climatology, and “recent”
geology. This wide usage of carbon-14 dating is reflected
in the quotes below.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, B3 Radiocarbon
Dating – Radiocarbon dating was developed by American
chemist Willard Libby and his colleagues in 1949, and it quickly
became one of the most widely used tools in archaeology.”
– "Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – Archaeology
has been the chief beneficiary of radioactive-carbon dating,
but late glacial and postglacial chronological studies
in geology have also been aided greatly.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E2 Carbon-14 Method – Radiocarbon dating techniques,
first developed by the American chemist Willard F. Libby and
his associates at the University of Chicago in 1947, are frequently
useful in deciphering
time-related problems in archaeology, anthropology, oceanography,
pedology, climatology, and recent geology.” –
"Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
However, the most significant fundamental issue in carbon-14
dating is its process. Carbon-14 is unique among dating processes
for several reasons, as we will see below. We will start our
examination of the process with the key isotopes. Carbon-14
involves the radioactive decay of the parent isotope carbon-14
into the stable daughter isotope nitrogen.
“Archeology, VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF
FINDS, B Absolute Dating B3 Radiocarbon Dating, [PHOTO CAPTION]
Radiocarbon (C-14) Dating – Radiation
counters are used to detect the electrons given off by
decaying C-14 as it turns into nitrogen.” –
"Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Carbon-14
dating – also called radiocarbon dating, method
of age determination that depends upon the
decay to nitrogen of radiocarbon (carbon-14).” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
As
we have seen, other dating methods focus on the quantity of
daughter isotopes to determine the amount of radioactive decay
that has occurred, and therefore, the age of the item. However,
nitrogen is a very common element that makes its way throughout
the biological world by means of a normal process called the
nitrogen cycle.
“Nitrogen
cycle – circulation
of nitrogen in various forms through nature. Nitrogen, a component
of proteins and nucleic acids, is essential to life on Earth.
Although 78 percent by volume of the atmosphere is
nitrogen gas, this abundant reservoir exists in a form
unusable by most organisms. Through
a series of microbial transformations, however, nitrogen is
made available to plants, which in turn ultimately sustain
all animal life. The steps, which are not altogether sequential,
fall into the following classifications: nitrogen fixation,
nitrogen assimilation, ammonification, nitrification, and
denitrification. Nitrogen
fixation, in which nitrogen gas is converted into inorganic
nitrogen compounds, is mostly (90 percent) accomplished
by certain bacteria
and blue-green algae (see nitrogen fixation)…Nitrates
and ammonia resulting from nitrogen fixation are assimilated into the specific tissue compounds of algae and higher plants.
Animals then ingest
these algae and plants, converting them into their own
body compounds. The remains of all living things—and
their waste products—are decomposed by microorganisms
in the process of ammonification, which
yields ammonia…Ammonia can leave the soil or be
converted into other nitrogen compounds, depending in part
on soil conditions. Nitrification, a process carried out by
nitrifying bacteria (q.v.), transforms soil ammonia into nitrates,
which plants can incorporate
into their own tissues. Nitrates also are metabolized
by denitrifying bacteria (q.v.), which are especially active in water-logged,
anaerobic soils. The
action of these bacteria tends to deplete soil nitrates, forming
free atmospheric nitrogen.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Consequently,
since nitrogen gets into all living things through the nitrogen
cycle, the amount of nitrogen in any item would not necessarily
equate to or indicate the amount of radioactive decay from
carbon-14. In other words, nitrogen is such a common element
that its presence in any item is not a result of radioactive
decay but other extremely widespread natural process and,
therefore, in this dating method the presence of the daughter
element cannot indicate the amount of decay or age of an item.
This is where the carbon-14 dating process becomes unique.
In carbon-14 dating, age is not determined by counting the
amount of daughter isotopes (nitrogen) as is the case with
other absolute dating methods. Instead, the amount of the
parent isotope, carbon-14 presently
in an item is used as the indicator of its age.
In
carbon-14 dating, the original amount of carbon-14 is considered
to be a “known” factor. The amount of carbon-14
missing from the “known,” original quantity indicates
how long decay has been occurring, and therefore the age.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – Unlike
most isotopic dating methods, the conventional carbon-14 dating technique is not based on counting daughter isotopes.
It relies instead on
the progressive decay or disappearance of the radioactive
parent with time.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
The
next critical question regards what items carbon-14 can be
used to date. To answer this question, we need to understand
where the isotope carbon-14 comes from. As indicated by the
quotes below, carbon-14 is formed when cosmic rays, full of
free neutrons (neutrons not inside or apart of an atom), come
in contact with nitrogen in the earth’s upper atmosphere.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – The discovery
of natural carbon-14 by Willard Libby of the United
States began with his recognition
that a process that
had produced radiocarbon in the laboratory was also going
on in the Earth's upper atmosphere—namely, the bombardment
of nitrogen by free neutrons.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Carbon-14
dating – also called radiocarbon dating, method
of age determination that depends upon the decay to nitrogen
of radiocarbon (carbon-14). Carbon-14
is continually formed in nature by the interaction of neutrons
with nitrogen-14 in the Earth's atmosphere; the neutrons required
for this reaction are produced by cosmic rays interacting
with the atmosphere.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Cosmic
ray – a high-speed
particle—either an atomic nucleus or an electron—that travels throughout the Milky Way Galaxy,
including the solar system.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Radiocarbon
– In nature,
radiocarbon forms when high-energy atomic particles called
cosmic rays smash into Earth's atmosphere. Cosmic rays cause
atoms in the atmosphere to break down into electrons, neutrons,
protons, and other particles. Some neutrons strike the nuclei
of nitrogen atoms in the atmosphere. Each of these nuclei
absorbs a neutron and then loses a proton. In this way, a
nitrogen atom becomes a radiocarbon atom.” –
Worldbook, Contributor: Rainer Berger, Ph.D., Professor of
Anthropology, Geography, and Geophysics, University
of California, Los Angeles.
After
being formed in the atmosphere by cosmic rays, carbon-14 makes
its way into lifeforms, fossils, and geologic items in the
following manner. First, like normal carbon, carbon-14 joins
with oxygen in the atmosphere, thus becoming part of earth’s
carbon dioxide supply.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – Newly
created carbon-14 atoms were presumed to react with atmospheric
oxygen to form carbon dioxide (CO2) molecules. Radioactive
carbon thus was visualized as gaining entrance wherever atmospheric
carbon dioxide enters—into
land plants by photosynthesis, into animals that feed on the
plants, into marine waters and freshwaters as a dissolved
component, and from there into aquatic plants and animals.
In short, all parts of the carbon cycle were seen to be invaded
by the isotope carbon-14.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
And
second, as a component of some carbon dioxide atoms, carbon-14
then enters the carbon cycle. As indicated by the quotes below,
the carbon cycle is the process by which the carbon present
in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere enters into all living
organisms on the earth.
“Radiocarbon
– Plants absorb
radiocarbon from the carbon dioxide in the air. Human beings
and other animals take in radiocarbon chiefly from the food
provided by plants. Radiocarbon dating is a process used
to determine the age of an ancient object by measuring its
radiocarbon content…The
radiocarbon in the tissues of a living organism decays extremely
slowly, but it is continuously renewed as long as the organism
lives. After the organism dies, it no longer takes in air
or food, and so it no longer absorbs radiocarbon. The radiocarbon
already in the tissues continues to decrease at a constant
rate. This steady decay at a known rate-a half-life of
approximately 5,730 years-enables scientists to determine
an object's age.” – Worldbook, Contributor: Rainer
Berger, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology, Geography, and Geophysics,
University of California,
Los Angeles.
“Carbon,
IV SCIENTIFIC APPLICATIONS – Carbon-14
is continuously produced in the atmosphere by cosmic rays
and is incorporated into all living matter. As carbon-14
decays, with a half-life of 5760 years, the
proportion of carbon-14 to carbon-12 in a given specimen is
a measure of its approximate age.” – "Carbon,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Carbon
cycle – in
biology, circulation of carbon in various forms through
nature. Carbon
is a constituent of all organic compounds, many of which
are essential to life on Earth. The
source of the carbon found in living matter is carbon dioxide
(CO2) in the air or dissolved in water. Algae
and terrestrial green plants (producers) are the chief
agents of carbon dioxide fixation through the process of photosynthesis,
through which carbon dioxide and water are converted into
simple carbohydrates. These compounds are used by the producers
to carry on metabolism, the excess being stored as fats and
polysaccharides. The
stored products are then eaten by consumer animals, from protozoans
to man, which convert them into other forms. All
animals return CO2 directly to the atmosphere as a by-product
of their respiration. The carbon present in animal wastes
and in the bodies of all organisms is released as CO2 by decay,
or decomposer, organisms
(chiefly bacteria and fungi) in a series of microbial
transformations. Part
of the organic carbon—the remains of organisms—has accumulated in the Earth's crust as fossil fuels (e.g., coal,
gas, and petroleum), limestone,
and coral.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004
Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E2 Carbon-14 Method – Through
metabolic activity, the level of carbon-14 in a living organism
remains in constant balance with the level in the atmosphere
or some other portion of the earth's dynamic reservoir, such
as the ocean. Upon the organism's death, carbon-14 begins
to disintegrate at a known rate, and no further replacement
of carbon from atmospheric carbon dioxide can take place.”
– "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, B3 Radiocarbon
Dating – All
living organisms accumulate this isotope through their metabolism
until it is in balance with levels in the atmosphere, but
when they die they absorb no more. Because the nucleus of
C-14 decays at a known rate, scientists can determine the
age of organic substances such as bones, plant matter, shells,
and charcoal by measuring the amount on C-14 that remains
in them.” – "Archaeology," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
As
described in these quotes, living organisms participate in
the carbon cycle through metabolic activity for as long as
they remain alive. Consequently, living
organisms are constantly taking in carbon from the carbon
cycle, including carbon-14 in very small amounts. However,
when an organism dies, metabolic activity ceases. From this
point, the carbon-14 in the organism continues to decay at
its normal rate without being replaced through metabolic processes.
This means that through decay, the amount of carbon-14 in
a dead organism will decrease in contrast to the amount in
the rest of the world. The “missing” amount of
carbon-14 then indicates how much decay has occurred, and,
therefore, how long the organism has been dead. Consequently,
carbon-14 can be used to date any thing that was once living
and, therefore, acquired carbon and carbon-14 through the
carbon cycle.
Here
the critical question is how much carbon-14 is present in
the carbon cycle? As indicated by the quotes below, the answer
is that carbon-14 constitutes about 1 out of every trillion
carbon atoms in the carbon cycle.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – Invasion is
probably not the proper word for a component that Libby calculated
should be present only to the extent of about one atom in a trillion stable carbon atoms.
So low is such a carbon-14
level that no one had detected natural carbon-14 until Libby,
guided by his own predictions, set out specifically to measure
it.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Radiocarbon
– All living things contain radiocarbon. In the atmosphere, there is about one atom of radiocarbon for every
trillion molecules of carbon dioxide gas.” –
Contributor: Rainer Berger, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology,
Geography, and Geophysics, University of California,
Los Angeles.
We
now know how carbon-14 dating works and and have answered
the question with regard to what items carbon-14 can be used
to date. Carbon-14 can be used to date any item that participated
in the carbon cycle. However, this process also creates one
of the primary known limitations on carbon-14 dating. Carbon-14
cannot be used to date any rock or item. Instead, as indicated
by the process, carbon-14 can only date items with material
that was once living.
“Archaeology,
How archaeologists interpret findings – The most widely used dating method is radiocarbon dating. This method
requires organic material-that is, something that was once
living, such as plant parts, charcoal from cooking pits,
bone, or shells.” – Contributor: Thomas R. Hester,
Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology, University of Texas,
Austin.
The
second prominent limitation on carbon-14 regards the question
of how far back carbon-14 dating can be used. As indicated
by the quotes below, the oldest items that carbon-14 can date
are about 50,000 years old.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Evaluation and presentation schemes in dating,
Origin of radioactive elements used – Geologic events
of the not-too-distant past are more easily dated by using
recently formed radioisotopes with short half-lives that produce
more daughter products per unit time…The most widely used radioactive cosmogenic
isotope is carbon of mass 14 (14C), which provides a method
of dating events that have occurred over roughly the past
50,000 years.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – The occurrence
of natural radioactive carbon in the atmosphere provides a
unique opportunity to date organic materials as old as 50,000 years.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, B3 Radiocarbon
Dating – Radiocarbon
methods can date sites that are up to 40,000 or 50,000 years
old.” – "Archaeology," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E2 Carbon-14 Method – The
rapid disintegration of carbon-14 generally limits the dating
period to approximately 50,000 years, although the method
is sometimes extended to 70,000 years. Uncertainty in measurement increases
with the age of the sample.” – "Dating
Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
It
is also important to note, as indicated by the last quote
above, that the older the sample is, the less reliable the
carbon-14 date is.
The
reason that carbon-14 is limited to 50,000 years or less is
because of the relatively short-half life of carbon-14. For
example, in contrast to uranium-238, which has a half-life
of 4.5 billion years, carbon-14’s half-life is 5,730
years (or 5,760), which means that it will take 5,730 years
for half of carbon-14 to decay into nitrogen.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E1 Basic Theory – At the end of the period constituting
one half-life, half of the original quantity of radioactive element has
decayed; after another half-life, half of what was left
is halved again, leaving one-fourth of the original quantity,
and so on. Every radioactive element has its own half-life; for example, that of
carbon-14 is 5730 years and that of uranium-238 is 4.5 billion
years.” – "Dating Methods," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
“Radiocarbon
– The radiocarbon
already in the tissues continues to decrease at a constant
rate. This steady decay at a known rate-a half-life of approximately
5,730 years-enables scientists to determine an object's
age.” – Worldbook, Contributor: Rainer Berger,
Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology, Geography, and Geophysics,
University of California,
Los Angeles.
Furthermore,
although it is not a limitation on what carbon-14 can date,
it is significant that carbon-14 dating involves measuring
for extremely minute quantities of the carbon-14 isotope dispersed
throughout a sample.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – A
major breakthrough in carbon-14 dating occurred with the introduction
of the accelerator mass spectrometer. This instrument
is highly sensitive and allows precise
ages on as little as one milligram of carbon, where the
older method might require as much as 25
grams for ancient material. The increased sensitivity
results from the fact that all of the carbon atoms of mass
14 can be counted in a mass spectrometer. By contrast, if
carbon-14 is to be measured by its radioactivity, only those
few atoms decaying during the measurement period are recorded.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
(Keep in mind that the mass spectrometer doesn’t
provide an age nor does it date anything. It only provides
a count of the amount of isotopes, such as carbon-14, currently
in a sample. This count is then used in an equation with other
factors, some of which are assumed, in order to calcute the
age of the object.)
As
the quote above specifically states, formerly at least 25
grams of sample were required. But now, however, dates are
determined using samples as little as “one milligram”
(0.001 grams) of carbon. A milligram is equal to about one
twenty-five thousandths of an ounce. Consequently, carbon-14
dates are based upon looking for one in a trillion atoms in
samples that are smaller than one half of one percent of an
ounce.
Having
established the limitations on what carbon-14 can date, we
arrive at 2 problems with carbon-14 dating that are uncontested.
In other words, as we will see, these problems are acknowledged
by evolutionary scientists and geologists.
The
first problem with carbon-14 that is acknowledged by evolutionary
scientists is its susceptibility to contaminations. It is
known that carbon-14 samples are subject to contamination
to such an extent that numerous processes have been derived
in order to detect and correct for components of the sample
that may be “younger” than the sample itself.
This is explained in the quotes below.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – A final problem
of importance in carbon-14 dating is the matter of sample
contamination. If a sample of buried wood is impregnated
with modern rootlets or a piece of porous bone has recent
calcium carbonate precipitated in its pores, failure
to remove the contamination will result in a carbon-14 age
between that of the sample and that of its contaminant.
Consequently, numerous techniques for contaminant removal
have been developed. Among them are the removal of humic
acids from charcoal and the isolation of cellulose from wood
and collagen from bone. Today, contamination as a source of
error in samples younger than 25,000 years is relatively rare. Beyond that
age, however, the fraction of contaminant needed to have measurable
effect is quite small, and, therefore, undetected or unremoved
contamination may occasionally be of significance.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E2 Carbon-14 Method – Postdepositional contamination,
which is the most serious problem, may be caused by percolating
groundwater, incorporation of older or younger carbon, and
contamination in the field or laboratory.” –
"Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
seen indicated by the minute ratios and sample sizes described
previously, these quotes also attest that the amount of contamination
needed to affect a sample would be quite small. As the first
quote above states, beyond 25,000 years even a small amount
of contamination “may occasionally be of significance,”
which means the error in age may be “significant.”
The
second problem with carbon-14 dating surrounds the fact that
carbon dating utilizes the current trillion to 1 ratio in
the carbon cycle as the assumed starting quantity for once-living
items. Consequently, the present
ratio of carbon-14 in a sample is compared to a starting
ratio of a trillion to 1 to determine how much carbon-14 decay
has occurred and, therefore, how much time has passed since
organism’s death. However, since the amount of carbon-14
in the carbon cycle functions as the assumed starting ratio
in the dated item, this equation both assumes and requires
that the ratio of carbon to carbon-14 in the carbon cycle
has not changed for the entire 50,000 years that carbon-14
can date. Carbon-14 calculations assume and require that the
ratio of carbon to carbon-14 has not changed but has remained
1 trillion to 1 for the last 50,000 years. Any deviation in
the starting ratio of carbon to carbon-14 will affect the
carbon-14 age.
For
example, we might consider what would happen if the carbon
to carbon-14 ratio in the carbon cycle were 2 trillion to
1 instead of the 1 trillion to 1 ratio we measure presently.
If we assumed that the ratio was constant and has always been
1 trillion to 1 throughout the past 50,000 years and then
we measured a 4 trillion to 1 present ratio in a dead organism,
it would appear that three-quarters
of the carbon-14 had already decayed. Therefore, we would
conclude that 2 half-lives of carbon-14 would have occurred
and that the organism had been dead for 11,460 years, which
is equal to 2 half-lives of 5,730 years each. In reality,
however, if the starting ratio was 2 trillion to 1 in the
past instead of 1 trillion to 1, then only 1 half-life would
have occurred and the organism would have died only 5,730
years ago, which is well within the Biblical timescale, rather
than 11,460 years ago, which exceeds the Biblical timescale.
Thus, if the ratio of carbon to carbon-14 in the carbon cycle
changes over earth’s history, the age of carbon-14 dates
will easily jump by thousands or tens of thousands of years
depending upon how much the ratio differs at any given time.
At this point, we can compare this example to the stated reality
concerning variations in the carbon-14 ratio.
Concerning
the need for the carbon-14 ratio to remain uniform throughout
the carbon cycle, we arrive at 2 essential questions. First,
is carbon-14 distributed uniformly in plants and animals today?
And second, has the present level been uniform throughout
the past?
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – So low is
such a carbon-14 level that no one had detected natural carbon-14
until Libby, guided by his own predictions, set out specifically
to measure it. His success initiated a series of measurements
designed to answer
two questions: Is the concentration of carbon-14 uniform throughout
the plant and animal kingdoms? And, if
so, has today's uniform level prevailed throughout the recent
past? After showing the essential uniformity of
carbon-14 in living material, Libby sought to answer the
second question…” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
The
relevance of these questions is simple. If not uniform, then
the initial starting amount is not known. If the initial starting
amount is not known, then it is impossible to know how much
carbon-14 is missing and how much decay has occurred. If you
can’t know how much decay has occurred, then you can’t
determine the age.
And
even though the last line of the excerpt above indicates that
“the essential uniformity of carbon-14” had been
shown, the following quote from just 3 paragraphs later in
the same article indicates that this is not ultimately correct.
In fact, the quantity of carbon-14 varies from place to place.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – It is now clear
that carbon-14 is not homogeneously distributed among today's
plants and animals. The occasional exceptions all involve
nonatmospheric contributions of carbon-14-depleted carbon
dioxide to organic synthesis. Specifically, volcanic carbon dioxide is known to depress the carbon-14
level of nearby vegetation and dissolved limestone carbonate
occasionally has a similar effect on freshwater mollusks,
as does upwelling of deep ocean water on marine mollusks.
In every case, the living material affected gives the appearance of
built-in age.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
As
this quote plainly states, environmental factors effect carbon-14’s
distribution in things living in different places. However,
what is so striking about the quote above is its citation
of carbon dioxide emissions from volcanoes as “depressing
the carbon-14 level” of nearby organisms and limestone
rock with the subsequent effect of giving the material “the
appearance of built-in age.” Effectively, the emission
of normal carbon from the volcanoes dilutes the carbon-14
ratio to levels below the standard trillion to 1. This is
extraordinarily important given the role of volcanic activity
in the Judeo-Christian account of a global flood. With volcanic
activity occurring on a worldwide scale as the crust of the
earth is broken up into plates and with enormous geyser-like
fountains spewing volcanic gases up into the atmosphere all
around the earth, a vast inflow quantity of normal carbon
would suddenly be thrust into the carbon cycle. Potentially,
organisms after the flood would have a drastically lower carbon-14
ratio, giving them the faulty appearance of “built-in
age,” when in reality, the carbon-14 ratio was simply
lower to begin with.
And,
as stated in the quote below, in addition to the fact that
carbon-14 ratios are not uniform around the world even today,
the ratio of carbon-14 is also known to vary over time.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – In addition to
spatial variations of the carbon-14 level, the question of
temporal variation has received much study. A 2 to 3 percent depression of the atmospheric
radioactive-carbon level since
1900 was noted soon after Libby's pioneering work, almost
certainly the result of the dumping of huge volumes
of carbon-14-free carbon dioxide into the air through smokestacks.
Of more recent date was the
overcompensating effect of man-made carbon-14 injected into
the atmosphere during nuclear-bomb testing. The
result was a rise in the atmospheric carbon-14 level by more
than 50 percent. Fortunately, neither
effect has been significant in the case of older samples submitted
for carbon-14 dating. The
ultimate cause of carbon-14 variations with time is generally
attributed to temporal fluctuations in the cosmic rays that
bombard the upper atmosphere and create terrestrial carbon-14.
Whenever the number
of cosmic rays in the atmosphere is low, the rate of carbon-14
production is correspondingly low, resulting in a decrease
of the radioisotope in the carbon-exchange reservoir described
above. Studies have revealed that the atmospheric
radiocarbon level prior to 1000 BC deviates measurably from
the contemporary level. In the year 6200 BC it was about 8
percent above what it is today. In the context of carbon-14
dating, this departure
from the present-day level means that samples with a true
age of 8,200 years would be dated by radiocarbon as 7,500
years old. The problems stemming from temporal variations
can be overcome to a large degree by the use of calibration
curves in which the carbon-14 content of the sample being
dated is plotted against that of objects of known age. In this way, the deviations can be compensated for and
the carbon-14 age of
the sample converted to a much more precise date. Calibration
curves have been constructed using dendrochronological
data (tree-ring measurements of bristlecone pines as old as 8,200 years);
periglacial varve,
or lake sediment, data (see above); and, in
archaeological research, certain materials of historically
established ages.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
According
to the quote above, different factors affect the amount of
carbon-14 generated and present in the atmosphere and the
carbon cycle at different periods of earth’s history
over the last 50,000 years. First, notice that “since
1900” smokestacks in industrial countries have resulted
in a 2 to 3 percent decrease in the ratio of carbon-14 to
normal carbon. Second, notice similarly that nuclear-bomb
testing in technological countries since the dawn of the atomic
age has resulted in a “50 percent” increase in
the carbon-14 ratio. These figures indicate just how sensitive
this ratio is to environmental fluctuations, which in turn
have a significant impact on the apparent age of dated items.
Third,
notice from the quote above that beyond smokestacks causing
a 2-3 percent shift and nuclear testing causing a 50 percent
shift, “the ultimate cause of carbon-14 variations”
over time is that cosmic rays vary in intensity at different
times. This means that cosmic rays affect carbon-14 levels
and ratios constantly and to an extent more significant than
industrial or nuclear technology. In fact, according to the
quote, these fluctuations constitute “measurable deviation,”
which in the example cited is as much as 8 percent in the
period between 1,000 and 6,200 BC. On this note, another question
arises concerning how we know that the carbon-14 level was
different at 1,000 or 6,200 BC? Is it simply that that, unless
we assume a different level at that time, evolutionary predictions
about dates don’t match with carbon-14 dates?
And
fourth, notice that “objects of known age” are
being used to calibrate carbon-14 dating. In light of the
fact that relative dating methods, the geologic column, other
radiometric dating methods have already been shown not to
work, what other methods could be used to “calibrate”
carbon-14 ages? In addition, the quote lists tree-ring dating
and varve or lake sedimentation as a physical means of indicating
and correcting for such deviations in the carbon-14 level.
In a later section examining non-radiometric forms of absolute
dating, we will demonstrate that neither of these phenomena
are reliable forms of dating either. However, even the comparison
to tree-ring dating and lake sedimentation demonstrates that
the only reason for adjusting the “starting level”
of carbon-14 is the fact that age of carbon-14 does not correspond
to the age expectations dictated by other dating methods.
Thus, not only is carbon-14 dating left without a means to
identify and calibrate changes in the ratio of carbon-14,
but this constitutes yet another example of circular reasoning
in evolutionary dating. Effectively, one method that doesn’t
work on its own is being used to prove another method that
doesn’t work on its own either, and yet somehow, both
faulty methods are considered reliable support for one another.
Moreover,
the most important issue here is the impact that fluctuations
in the carbon-14 ratio have on calculating ages by carbon-14.
If the starting amount of carbon-14, the amount in the carbon
cycle, is not constant but subject to changes in the past,
there is no way to calculate ages by carbon-14 unless we know
with certainty when and to what extent the carbon-14 ratio
changed. We will return to known, dramatic changes in the
carbon-14 ratio during the past a little later below as we
cover the contested problems with carbon-14 dating. However,
on this note, two additional points are worth mentioning.
Number one, the potential for carbon-14 ratios to change over
time makes carbon-14 dates “adjustable.” If carbon-14
dating results in a date that does not fit with expected or
existing timelines, the date can be “corrected”
or “calibrated” by assuming a slight change in
the carbon-14 ratio at some point in the past. Under these
conditions the actual date simply cannot be known. Number
two, once it is admitted that the starting level and even
the amount of cosmic rays can fluctuate up and down, the application
of uniformitarianism to this dating method is nullified. It
simply cannot be assumed that carbon-14 ratios remained uniform
in time, just as they cannot be assumed in location either,
as we have already seen above.
In
summary, carbon-14 suffers from the obstacle that while the
present ratio of carbon-14 is the standard used to measure
the duration of decay and the age of an item, it is a known
reality that carbon-14 ratios differ from one location to
another in the present and also differ throughout the past.
Thus, the underlying assumption of uniformitarianism has been
disproved in the case of carbon-14. These factors make carbon-14
into an “adjustable” dating method that is based
upon assumed ratios that are known to fluctuate. And consequently,
carbon-14 ages are far from being simple, observed, empirical
fact. This is similar to what we saw in the other dating methods,
in which other assumptions were also adjusted in order to
reconcile discrepancies and bring them back to the evolutionary
ideal or expected evolutionary date or age.
With
these 2 acknowledged, uncontested problems facing carbon-14
dating, it is no wonder that the evolutionary scientific community
assesses carbon-14 dating as unreliable. In light of the problems
described above for determining the actual starting ratio
or level of carbon-14, Britannica gives the following assessment
of the reliability of carbon-14 dating.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – It is clear that
carbon-14 dates lack the accuracy that traditional historians
would like to have. There may come a time when all radiocarbon
ages rest on firmer knowledge of the sample's original carbon-14
level than is now available. Until then, the inherent error from this uncertainty must be recognized.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Having
established this conclusion from Britannica Encyclopedia,
we can also offer a similar assessment articulated by evolutionary
anthropologist Robert Lee, as cited by creationist Thomas
Kendall in his presentation titled, “Scientific Evidences for a Young Earth.”
“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.” – Evolutionary Anthropologist
Robert Lee (Cited on “Scientific Evidences for a Young Earth,”
Thomas Kindall, Seattle Creation Conference 2004, Copyright
Northwest Creation Network, nwcreation.net, 47 minutes, 55
seconds)
Consequently,
judging even from the acknowledged problems in carbon-14 dating,
the method cannot be regarded as reliable and its ages cannot
be regarded as “firm” empirical fact. This fact
is even further substantiated by the evidence demonstrating
what might be regarded as “contested” problems
with carbon-14 dating. Unlike the “uncontested problems”
listed above, these “contested” problems are not
agreed upon by both sides. There is strong evidence in support
of these “contested” problems and it should be
noted that it is the interpretation of that evidence, which
is in dispute, not the evidence itself. This will become apparent
below as we establish exactly what the evidence is.
The
central issue of this problem surrounds the concepts of full
saturation and equilibrium. Every year radioactive decay will
convert a certain percentage
of the total amount of carbon-14 into nitrogen. Consequently,
radioactive decay subtracts from the total amount of carbon-14.
Conversely, cosmic rays produce a certain quantity
of carbon-14 every year. Consequently, cosmic rays add to
the total amount of carbon-14. However, unlike the amount
of carbon-14 removed by decay, the amount of carbon-14 added
by cosmic rays is not simply a percentage or ratio. It is
a normal, fixed amount.
To
illustrate these abstract concepts of “fixed amounts”
and “percentages” and how they relate to one another,
we might consider the following illustration. Suppose a man
works for a company that, at the start of every year he works
there, pays $10,000 into a retirement fund for him. That $10,000
would be a fixed amount. This payment is an adding mechanism.
It adds to the total amount in the man’s retirement
fund. In contrast, at the end of every year the government
might require the man to pay 10% of the retirement fund in
taxes. This tax is a subtracting mechanism. It subtracts from
his total wealth, but unlike the adding mechanism, which is
a fixed amount, the subtracting mechanism is a percentage.
To
understand how the fixed amount and the percentage relate
to one another, we can further consider how these 2 mechanisms
affect the amount of money in this man’s fund year after
year. After the first year, he would have $10,000 in the fund
as a result of the fixed adding mechanism. However, that same
year, he would pay 10% in taxes, which is only $1,000 dollars.
This would leave him with a total of $9,000 in the fund. After
the second year, another fixed amount of $10,000 would be
added to the fund, for a total of $19,000. While the amount
added remains the same because it is a fixed amount, the amount
subtracted changes because it is a percentage or proportion
of the total. Consequently, the second year, the 10% paid
in taxes would be $1,900 rather than the $1,000 paid in taxes
the previous year. This would leave $17,100 in the fund at
the end of the second year. Every year the total amount in
the fund would increase so long as the percentage equaled
less than the $10,000 deposited by the company. However, after
many years, once the fund reaches $100,000 total, the 10%
tax would be equal to the $10,000 deposited by the company.
The fund would now be completely saturated because equilibrium
would be reached between the fixed amount of the adding mechanism
and the percentage removed by the subtracting mechanism. Every
year $10,000 would be added and $10,000 would also be subtracted.
In this state of equilibrium or saturation, year after year,
the amount in the fund would remain at $100,000.
The
process is the same with the amount of carbon-14 in the carbon
cycle. One mechanism, cosmic rays, is adding to the total
amount of carbon-14 in a fixed amount year after year.
“Cosmic
rays…slam into atoms in the earth’s atmosphere
and they start a process that makes carbon-14 out of nitrogen…At
today’s cosmic ray rate…the production rate is
8 kilograms per year, or if you calibrated it in pounds,
18 pounds…Right
now the total amount that we have…in the whole earth
ecosystem is 62 tons.” – “Radiocarbon,
Creation and the Genesis Flood,” Dr. Russell Humphreys
Ph.D., Creation Science Foundation Ltd., 7 minutes, 15 seconds
Another
mechanism, radioactive decay, is subtracting a percentage
of the total of carbon-14 year after year.
“The
half-life of carbon-14 is 5700 years…in about 6,000 years from now, we’ll
have half that much…That means that about 0.01 percent,
1 hundredth of a percent, of carbon-14…decays every
year.” – “Radiocarbon, Creation and
the Genesis Flood,” Dr. Russell Humphreys Ph.D., Creation
Science Foundation Ltd., 7 minutes, 15 seconds
When
the total amount of carbon-14 reaches a level where the percentage
removed annually by decay is equal to the fixed amount added
annually by cosmic rays, equilibrium between the mechanisms
occurs. From this point in time forward, the total amount
of carbon-14 will remain the same. Consequently, this is the
fullest saturation level that carbon-14 can achieve since
no more can or will be added to the total.
“Right
now the total amount that we have…in the whole earth
ecosystem is 62 tons. 0.01 percent of that’s decaying
every year and that works out to about 7 kilograms every year
decaying. So, we have 8 kilograms or 18 pounds being
produced and 7 kilograms or 15 pounds decaying…The production rate is a little bit greater than the decay rate so it’s
still increasing…When
it finally builds up to about 75 tons, then the decay rate
and the production rate will be equal. In other words,
it will be decaying
at 8 kilograms per year, or 18 pounds per year, and being produced at 18 pounds per year. So, the
amount of carbon-14 would level of at the maximum of 75 tons
of carbon-14…75 tons of carbon-14, that’s
the maximum amount we can have in the whole earth ecosystem.”
– “Radiocarbon, Creation and the Genesis Flood,”
Dr. Russell Humphreys Ph.D., Creation Science Foundation Ltd.,
7 minutes, 15 seconds
The
problem is that the earth has not yet reached saturation.
The maximum amount of carbon-14 in the carbon cycle is 75
tons. Presently, the earth has only 62 tons of carbon-14 in
the carbon cycle. This reveals several facts about the earth’s
age that are relevant to carbon dating.
First,
the fact that earth has not yet reached equilibrium requires
a model of carbon-14 levels that includes the following. Number
one, there would have to be an explanation for how carbon-14
reached as high as the current amount. Number two, there would
have to be an explanation for why the earth has not yet reached
saturation. After billions of years of the carbon cycle, the
earth should have reached saturation a long time ago. There
are only 2 possibilities for why it has not. Either, earth’s
history is too short
to reach saturation and equilibrium, or there was a historic
event that removed a very large portion of carbon-14 recently
enough that earth is still building back up toward equilibrium,
a build-up that is still occurring today. This point also
is indicative of a global flood, as we will describe in greater
detail later on.
Second,
the fact that the earth has not yet reached equilibrium demonstrates
that there was less carbon-14 in the past. Thus, the ratio
of carbon to carbon-14 was lower in the past than the current
trillion to 1 ratio. This problem becomes even more insurmountable
if the assumption of uniformitarianism is maintained. If we
assume, as uniformitarianism does, that geologic processes
have been the same historically, only the following options
are possible. As time moves forward, either the total amount
of carbon-14 should be increasing (if equilibrium has not
been reached) or the total amount of carbon-14 should remain
the same (if equilibrium has been reached). Conversely, if
you go backward in time, either the total amount of carbon-14
should be the same as it is today (if equilibrium had already
been reached in the past) or the total amount of carbon-14
should be less than it is today (if equilibrium had not been
reached in the past). In short, the options are that the past
should have either the same or less carbon-14 than today.
Yet
evolutionists assert that there were higher levels of carbon-14
in the past. The quote below indicates that 3,000 years ago
(1,000 BC) there was a “measurable difference”
in the level of carbon-14. And, the quote goes on to state
that 8,200 years ago (6,200 BC) the level of carbon-14 was
actually almost 10 percent higher
than today. These different levels of carbon-14 at times past
are attributed to differences in the amount of cosmic rays
bombarding the atmosphere at given points in time, which of
course in turn produces carbon-14.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – Studies have
revealed that the atmospheric radiocarbon level prior to 1000
BC deviates measurably from the contemporary level. In the
year 6200 BC it was about 8 percent above what it is today.
In the context of carbon-14 dating, this
departure from the present-day level means that samples with
a true age of 8,200 years would be dated by radiocarbon as
7,500 years old.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
Asserting
a higher amount of carbon-14 in the past than is present today
indicates 3 things. Number one, since the amount of carbon-14
should be increasing not descreasing until it reaches equilibrium,
the only way for there to have been more carbon-14 in the
past is if there was some sort of a major global event that
removed a large portion of the carbon-14 so that even to this
day cosmic rays have not built it back up to that same level.
Number two, maybe
the higher amount of carbon-14 is simply an artificial way
to “adjust” an age that is “too young”
to fit with an overall historical scheme and make it “older”
so that will fit. And number three, no matter what the evolutionary principle
of uniformitarianism is being violated here.
Third,
not only do evolutionists believe in an 8 percent increase
in carbon-14 between 1,000 to 6,000 BC, but they also believe
there was a one-hundredfold increase in carbon dioxide in
the past as well. As established already earlier in this segment,
carbon-14 is measured in proportion to the quantity of normal
carbon, particularly starting in carbon dioxide. This is indicated
in the following 3 quotes. Notice in particular from the first
and third quotes that the ratio of carbon to carbon-14 can
also be stated as the difference between carbon dioxide and
carbon-14.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – Newly
created carbon-14 atoms were presumed to react with atmospheric
oxygen to form carbon dioxide (CO2) molecules. Radioactive
carbon thus was visualized as gaining entrance wherever atmospheric
carbon dioxide enters—into
land plants by photosynthesis, into animals that feed on the
plants, into marine waters and freshwaters as a dissolved
component, and from there into aquatic plants and animals.
In short, all parts of the carbon cycle were seen to be invaded
by the isotope carbon-14.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – Invasion is
probably not the proper word for a component that Libby calculated
should be present only to the extent of about one atom in a trillion stable carbon atoms.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Radiocarbon
– All living things contain radiocarbon. In the atmosphere, there is about one atom of radiocarbon for every
trillion molecules of carbon dioxide gas.” –
Contributor: Rainer Berger, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology,
Geography, and Geophysics, University of California,
Los Angeles.
Consequently,
as we have seen in cases of local volcanic activity, when
natural phenomena increase the amount of carbon dioxide, the
ratio of carbon dioxide to carbon-14 increases. In short,
an increase of carbon dioxide means that the carbon-14 becomes
an increasingly small proportion of carbon in the carbon cycle.
And, as the quote below also indicates, such an increase of
carbon dioxide falsely gives the appearance of greater age.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – It is now clear
that carbon-14 is not homogeneously distributed among today's
plants and animals. The occasional exceptions all involve
nonatmospheric contributions of carbon-14-depleted carbon
dioxide to organic synthesis. Specifically, volcanic carbon dioxide is known to depress the carbon-14
level of nearby vegetation and dissolved limestone carbonate
occasionally has a similar effect on freshwater mollusks,
as does upwelling of deep ocean water on marine mollusks.
In every case, the living material affected gives the appearance of
built-in age.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
As
such, a hundredfold increase in carbon dioxide would constitute
an emormous drop in the ratio of carbon-14 in the carbon cycle.
Effectively, if the current ratio of carbon to carbon-14 is
1 trillion to 1, a hundredfold increase in carbon dioxide
would multiply that ratio by 100 times producing a ratio of
100 trillion normal carbon atoms for every 1 carbon-14 atom.
Consequently, organisms from such a timeperiod would appear
to have undergone much more loss of carbon-14 from decay and,
therefore, would give off an enormously large false age.
Evolutionists
assert that this hundredfold increase of carbon dioxide existed
3.5 billion years ago.
"Atmosphere,
Development of the Earth's atmosphere, Sequence of events
in the development of the atmosphere, Variation in abundance
of carbon dioxide – The approximately hundredfold decline
of atmospheric CO2 abundances from 3,500,000,000 years ago
to the present has apparently not been monotonous.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
question is, without depending upon faulty radiometric dating
methods in order to get ages like 3.5 billion years, how can
we assign such a great age to this carbon dioxide increase?
In
creationist models, events that are assigned timeframes of
hundreds of millions or billions of years ago in the evolutionary
model are greatly contracted so that those same events occur
much more recently, within the last 6 to 10 thousand years.
These contractions of time occur because the radiometric dating
methods are not reliable for producing long ages. Since the
only radiometric dating methods capable of generating dates
beyond 50,000 years (radiometric dating of igneous and metamorphic
rocks) simply don’t work, as we have already seen, there
is little basis for asserting such an expansion of timeframes
to hundreds of millions or billions of years in the first
place. Consequently, the hundredfold increase in carbon dioxide
can be accepted by creationists on the basis of empirical
evidence supporting the concept of an increased proportion
of carbon dioxide, while the evolutionary timeframe for that
event is shown to be baseless and a matter of mere assumption.
But, even in the evolutionary timeframe, dramatic increases
in carbon dioxide are not limited to 3.5 billion years ago
and the last 100 years since industrialization with fossils
fuels and nuclear technology. Evolutionary theory also asserts
that carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere has “varied
greatly” from 1.6 million to 10,000 years ago. This
timeframe is denoted in the quote below by the terms “Pleistocene”
and “Holocene.”
“Climate,
Climatic variations and change, Causes of climatic variation,
Identified causes, Variations in atmospheric composition –
The concentration of carbon dioxide in the
Earth's atmosphere is known to have varied greatly in
geologic time and also in Pleistocene, Holocene, and Recent
times, including the past century.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
Pleistocene epoch spans from 1.6 million years ago to 10,000
years ago. And the Holocene epoch spans from 10,000 years
ago to the present.
“Geologic
Time, II DIVISION OF TIME – The
Quaternary Period is divided into the Pleistocene (1.6 million to 10,000 years before present) and Holocene (10,000 years
to the present) Epochs.” – "Geologic
Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
This
timeperiod covers the exact timeframe that carbon-14 dating
is used for. As we have already seen, carbon dating can only
be used on items that are at the most 50,000 years old.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – The occurrence
of natural radioactive carbon in the atmosphere provides a
unique opportunity to date organic materials as old as 50,000 years.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E2 Carbon-14 Method – The
rapid disintegration of carbon-14 generally limits the dating
period to approximately 50,000 years, although the method
is sometimes extended to 70,000 years.” – "Dating
Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, B3 Radiocarbon
Dating – Radiocarbon
methods can date sites that are up to 40,000 or 50,000 years
old.” – "Archaeology," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
Consequently,
carbon dioxide content has “varied greatly” at
the very times when we need to know a standard starting ratio
in the environment in order to compare and perform age calculations.
In
summary, we consider the amount of circular reasoning that
we’ve seen in all dating methods so far. You assume
rock strata took a long time to be laid down. You assume “faunal
succession,” that different types of animals arrived
on earth in order according to macro-evolutionary processes.
You date the ages of the rock strata by the fossils. You date
the fossils by the rock strata they are found in. From these
circular processes you obtain relative ages. Relative dating
then dictates radiometric ages. Radiometric ages then provide
ages that support relative dating. It is this circular reasoning
that dates the hundredfold increase in carbon dioxide to 3.5
billion years ago and other “great variations”
in carbon dioxide to 1.6 billion years ago. Consequently,
based upon the circular reasoning, the increase in carbon
dioxide is considered to be too far in the past to affect
carbon-14 ratios and ages. But without the circular reasoning
involved in such dating methods, such variations and increase
would be within the range of carbon-14 and, therefore, would
significantly impact the starting ratio of carbon-14 and the
ages carbon dating produces. Effectively, we'd be looking
at rocks and samples formed when the ratio of regular carbon
to carbon-14 was up to 100 times greater than today. But based
upon circular reasoning, we would be thinking that far more
decay of carbon-14 had occurred and, therefore, that the samples
were far older than they actually are.
In
conclusion, in addition to the uncontested problems with carbon-14
dating and the admitted unreliability of carbon-14 by evolutionary
scientists, the evidence and admissions by evolutionary scientists
also indicates that carbon-14 ratios have differed dramatically
in the past. In particular, the fact that the earth’s
carbon-14 supply has not yet reached saturation combined with
admissions of hundredfold carbon dioxide increases demonstrates
that the starting ratio of carbon-14 cannot be assumed or
used as a basis for making age calculations. On these grounds,
as well as those listed as “uncontested problems,”
we can see that carbon-14 dating does not work, particularly
for items, which date farther into the past and therefore
farther away from the known, present ratio of carbon-14.
Having
concluded our examination of both the uncontested and the
contested problems with carbon-14 dating, there is one last
issue that needs to be covered before moving forward to the
last few radiometric dating methods. In our previous segments
analyzing radiometric dating for igneous and metamorphic rocks,
we closed with a further demonstration of the devastating
impact that a global or near-global flood would have on those
dating methods. The same is true for carbon-14 dating. And
as we will see, there is substantial physical evidence that
global flood was responsible for a removal of massive amounts
of carbon dioxide, which in turn would affect the ratio of
carbon to carbon-14 as well as the saturation level of carbon-14
as described above.
The
first indication that massive amounts of carbon dioxide were
removed by the flood is the fact that sedimentary rocks contain
most of earth’s carbon dioxide, such as limestone.
“Earth
[planet], Earth's changing climate – Many scientists also believe that variations in the amount of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere are responsible for long-term
changes in the climate. Carbon dioxide, a "greenhouse gas,"
traps heat from the sun and warms Earth's atmosphere. Most
of Earth's carbon dioxide is locked in carbonate rocks, such
as limestone and dolomite. Earth's
climate today would be much warmer if the carbon dioxide trapped
in limestone were released into the atmosphere.”
– Contributor: Steven I. Dutch, Ph.D., Professor, Department
of Natural and Applied Sciences, University
of Wisconsin, Green Bay.
“Limestone
– sedimentary
rock composed mainly of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), usually
in the form of calcite or aragonite. It
may contain considerable amounts of magnesium carbonate
(dolomite) as well.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
As
established in an earlier section, the earth’s entire
surface is covered by a “thin veneer” of sedimentary
rocks approximately 1.8 kilometers or 1.1 miles thick on the
continents.
“Igneous
rock – The
Earth is composed predominantly of a large mass of igneous
rock with a very thin veneer of weathered material—namely,
sedimentary rock.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Sedimentary
rock – On the other hand, the area of outcrop and
exposure of sediment and sedimentary rock comprises
75 percent of the land surface and well over 90 percent of
the ocean basins and continental margins. In other words,
80–90 percent of the surface area of the Earth is mantled
with sediment or sedimentary rocks rather than with igneous
or metamorphic varieties. The sediment-sedimentary rock shell forms only a thin superficial layer.
The mean shell thickness in continental areas is 1.8 kilometres;
the sediment shell in the ocean basins is roughly 0.3
kilometre.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe
Edition
Furthermore,
as also established earlier, sedimentary rocks are by definition
predominantly laid down by water.
“Sedimentary
Rock – Sedimentary
Rock, in geology, rock composed of geologically reworked
materials, formed by the accumulation and consolidation of
mineral and particulate matter deposited by the action of water or, less
frequently, wind or glacial ice…Sedimentary rocks
are classified according to their manner of origin into mechanical
or chemical sedimentary rocks. Mechanical
rocks, or fragmental rocks, are composed of mineral particles
produced by the mechanical disintegration of other rocks and
transported, without
chemical deterioration, by
flowing water. They
are carried into larger bodies of water, where they are deposited
in layers…They may also have been dissolved in water
circulating through the parent rock formation and
then deposited in a sea or lake by precipitation from the
solution.” – "Sedimentary Rock,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Sedimentary,
rock – Sedimentary rock is rock
formed when mineral matter or remains of plants and animals
settle out of water or, less commonly, out of air or ice…Most sedimentary rock starts forming when grains of clay, silt, or sand
settle in river valleys or on the bottoms of lakes and oceans.”
– Worldbook, Contributor: Maria Luisa Crawford, Ph.D.,
Professor of Geology, Bryn
Mawr College.
The
fact that nearly all of the earth’s surface is covered
by a thin exterior layer of rock that was predominantly “deposited
by the action of water” and settled out “in layers”
from “larger bodies of water” is remarkably indicative
that the earth was given an outer coat of sedimentary rock
by a global flood. And since “most of Earth's carbon
dioxide” is contained in its sedimentary rock, the evidence
also consistently indicates that the flood removed a large
portion of the earth’s carbon dioxide and buried it
in the sedimentary rock. Furthermore, the removal of large
amounts of carbon dioxide would also corroborate the assessment
in our previous segment, “Focus on Critical Evidence:
Evidence for a Global Flood,” which stated that the
flood triggered a major climate shift from a previous, more
uniform “greenhouse” or perhaps tropical environment
prior to the flood to the colder climate we have today, which
cycles between summer and winter and varies around the planet.
(Additionally, the flood would also explain the expansion
of glaciers and arctic conditions, known as the Ice Age, due
to the global climates adjusting to the sudden absence of
vast amounts of “greenhouse” gases.)
The
second indication that massive amounts of carbon dioxide were
removed by the flood is the fact that the ocean itself is
a huge “reservoir for carbon dioxide.”
“Ocean,
Chemical and physical properties of seawater, Composition
of seawater,
Dissolved
inorganic substances – While the atmosphere is a
vast repository of oxygen compared to the oceans, the
total carbon dioxide content of the oceans is very large compared
to that of the atmosphere.”
“Ocean,
Chemical and physical properties of seawater, Composition
of seawater, Effects of human activities – It is
thought that the oceans, as a great reservoir of carbon
dioxide, will ameliorate this consequence of human activities
to some degree.”
Furthermore,
as stated previously, the Holocene Epoch spans from 10,000
years ago to the present. This is indicated by the second
quote below. Even evolutionary history agrees that the evidence
indicates “an accelerated rise in sea level” took
place in this timeframe.
“Geologic
Time, II DIVISION OF TIME – The Quaternary Period
is divided into the Pleistocene (1.6 million to 10,000 years
before present) and Holocene (10,000 years to the present)
Epochs. The Holocene is marked by the rapid retreat of the last continental ice sheets in Europe and North
America, an accelerated rise in sea level, climatic moderation,
and the expansion of human societies in every part of the
world.” – "Geologic Time," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
Not
only have the ocean waters risen but they are also quite cold.
In the quote above, this is reflected in the assertion that
the rise in ocean level corresponded to the melting of continental
ice sheets. Consequently, the water entering the oceans was
formerly ice and, therefore, relatively quite cold. And not
only has “an accelerated rise in sea level” taken
place in the last 10,000 years, during the Holocene Epoch,
but this same timeframe is also identified as a period of
“great variation” in carbon dioxide levels in
earth’s atmosphere.
“Climate,
Climatic variations and change, Causes of climatic variation,
Identified causes, Variations in atmospheric composition –
The concentration of carbon dioxide in the
Earth's atmosphere is known to have varied greatly in
geologic time and also in Pleistocene, Holocene, and Recent
times, including the past century.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Consequently,
earth’s oceans today are both higher and colder than
they were in the past. In fact, we can gain further insight
by understanding just how cold the oceans are. For comparison,
on the freezing point of water is 32 degrees Fahrenheit and
0 degrees Celsius, the boiling point of water is 212 degrees
Fahrenheit and 100 degrees Celsius, and human body temperature
is 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit and 37 degrees Celsius. In contrast,
at its surface, the ocean’s warmest temperatures are
79 degrees Fahrenheit (26 degrees Celsius) and the coolest
temperatures are 29.5 degrees Fahrenheit (1.4 degrees Celsius).
“Ocean
and Oceanography, VI TEMPERATURE – The
temperature of surface ocean water ranges from 26° C (79°
F) in tropical waters to -1.4° C (29.5° F), the freezing point
of seawater, in polar regions. Surface temperatures generally
decrease with increasing latitude, with seasonal variations
far less extreme than on land. In the upper 100 m (330 ft)
of the sea, the water
is almost as warm as at the surface. From 100 m to approximately
1000 m (3300 ft), the temperature drops rapidly to about 5°
C (41° F), and below this it drops gradually about another
4° to barely above freezing. The region of rapid change
is known as the thermocline.” – "Ocean and
Oceanography," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. ©
1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Below
the surface, temperatures are much cooler. As indicate by
the last quote above, from 100-1,000 meters the temperature
is about 5 degrees Celsius (41 degrees Fahrenheit). From below
1,000 meters, the temperature drops to just above freezing.
As indicated by the quote below, the average depth of the
ocean is 5,000 meters. Since ocean water is 5,000 meters deep
and all the water below 1,000 meters is just above freezing,
this means that four-fifths or 80 percent of the oceans is
just above freezing.
“Ocean
and Oceanography, II OCEAN BASIN STRUCTURE – The world ocean covers 71 percent of the earth's surface, or about
361 million sq km (140 million sq mi). Its average depth is 5000 m (16,000 ft), and its total volume is about 1,347,000,000 cu km (322,300,000 cu
mi).” – "Ocean and Oceanography," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
The
ocean’s cold temperature is relevant for the following
reason. In general, the ability of a liquid, such as ocean
water, to dissolve a gas, in this case carbon dioxide, depends
on its temperature. In the quote below, carbon dioxide is
“recovered” or released from the solvent (liquid)
in which it is dissolved by heating that liquid.
“Liquid,
Solutions and solubilities – The
ability of liquids to dissolve solids, other liquids, or gases
has long been recognized as one of the fundamental phenomena
of nature encountered in daily life…The
ability of one substance to dissolve another depends always
on the chemical nature of the substances, frequently
on the temperature, and occasionally on the pressure…In
this process, called absorption, the dissolved
carbon dioxide is later recovered, and the solvent is
made usable again by heating the carbon dioxide-rich solvent,
since the solubility
of a gas in a liquid usually (but not always) decreases with rising temperature.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Furthermore,
as indicated by the quote below, it is well understood that
the cold temperatures of the oceans, particularly at greater
depths, causes the retaining of a much larger amount of carbon
dioxide in the oceans than in the atmosphere. While a small
portion of that carbon dioxide is released as the waters warm
at low latitudes (closer to the tropics and equator), the
small portion that is released in the warmer, lower latitude
waters is balanced out by the acquisition of carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere in the colder waters.
“Atmosphere,
Composition of the present atmosphere, Major components of
the lower atmosphere, Distribution of carbon, nitrogen, and
oxygen compounds, Carbon compounds – Most
of the carbon in the oceans is present in cold, relatively
stagnant water at depth. It
returns to the atmosphere in association with slow upwelling
motion at low latitudes. As surface waters cool and sink at
high latitude, they draw carbon from the atmosphere, roughly
balancing the source at low latitude.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Consequently,
the reason that ocean’s cold temperature is relevant
is because if the ocean’s temperature was warmer, more
carbon dioxide would escape from the ocean into the atmosphere.
Thus, it is the present cold temperature of the ocean that
causes so much carbon dioxide to remain dissolved there.
In
conclusion, the bulk of earth’s carbon dioxide is present
in 2 locations that are directly associated with a global
flood, in a 1.1 mile thick veneer of sedimentary rock that
was laid down by water and in the ocean waters itself, which
have risen greatly sometime within the ten thousand years.
If there was a Flood that laid down a large amount of earth’s
carbon dioxide in sedimentary rocks, that dramatic drop in
carbon dioxide would cause the temperature of the earth to
drop. The dropping temperature would cause the ocean water
to retain more carbon dioxide. And this twofold drop in the
carbon dioxide level would cause a huge difference in the
carbon-14 ratios both before and after the flood. In addition,
some of the removed carbon dioxide would also include carbon-14,
causing the carbon-14 level to drop below the saturation point.
For both of these reasons, the ratio of carbon-14 before and
since the flood would be much lower than today’s relatively
high trillion to 1 ratio. Carbon dating would become progressively
accurate only in more recent items as the carbon-14 progressively
built up toward the present levels. Since this factor is not
taken into account during carbon-14 dating, the lower quantity
of carbon-14 in samples closer to the time before and right
after the flood is mistakenly regarded as a result of decay
time and age when in reality the samples simply started with
lower amounts of carbon-14. So, once again, the flood, which
is corroborated by both historic and geologic evidence, removes
the larger ages that result from the circular reasoning inherent
to radiometric dating, in this case carbon-14 dating. And
only by assuming evolutionary timeframes and ignoring the
evidence of a global flood, can any process provide the billions
of years of earth history necessary in order to allow for
evolution. Put simply, once a global flood is acknowledged
as a part of geologic history methods for producing the evolutionary
timescale become completely non-viable.
Lastly,
concerning carbon-14 dating in general, we have established
the following facts. First, because of its short half-life,
carbon-14 cannot date any items older than 50,000 years. Thus,
it cannot provide evidence for a 4.5 billion year history
for the earth. Second, carbon-14 dating suffers significantly
from contamination. Third, the ratio of carbon-14 can differ
from one region to another today as a result of increased
carbon dioxide from volcanic activity or industry. Fourth,
the ratio of carbon-14 has varied in the past. Both of these
2 factors prevent age calculations because age is determined
by the amount of carbon-14 that has decayed in comparison
to the starting ratio, which is defined as the same ratio
that is in the environment. Since the amount in the environment
varies with time and location, such calculations simply cannot
be made. Fifth, carbon-14 requires “calibration”
by other evolutionary dating methods that do not work and
utilize circular reasoning. Sixth, carbon-14 levels have not
yet reached equilibrium or full saturation as they should
have if the earth and the carbon cycle were around for billions
or millions of years. This fact demonstrates that the earth
is either not billions or millions of years old or that a
significant event, such as a global flood, removed large portions
of carbon from the carbon cycle relatively recently. Seventh,
most of earth’s carbon dioxide is trapped within sedimentary
rock and the oceans, both of which corroborate that a massive
flood removed large portions of carbon from the carbon cycle.
In turn, this would cause carbon-14 dates for items before
the flood and after the flood to have “built-in”
or false ages due to the fact that they would have lower carbon-14
ratios to begin with rather than carbon-14 being removed by
long periods of radioactive decay.
These
prohibitive facts are acknowledged by the evolutionary community.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Carbon-14
dating and other cosmogenic methods – It is clear that
carbon-14 dates lack the accuracy that traditional historians
would like to have. There may come a time when all radiocarbon
ages rest on firmer knowledge of the sample's original carbon-14
level than is now available. Until then, the inherent error from this uncertainty must be recognized.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“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.” – Evolutionary Anthropologist
Robert Lee (Cited on “Scientific Evidences for a Young Earth,”
Thomas Kindall, Seattle Creation Conference 2004, Copyright
Northwest Creation Network, nwcreation.net, 47 minutes, 55
seconds)
Yet
the evolutionary timescale is admittedly based upon carbon-14,
a dating method that is acknowledged to have “problems
and uncertainties.”
“Archaeology,
Interpretation, Dating – Absolute man-made chronology
based on king lists and records in Egypt
and Mesopotamia goes back only 5,000 years. For
a long time archaeologists searched for an absolute chronology
that went beyond this and could turn their relative chronologies
into absolute dates…There have been problems and uncertainties
about the application of the radioactive carbon method, but,
although it is less than perfect, it has given archaeology
a new and absolute chronology that goes back 40,000 years.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Clearly,
as hinted in the quote above, carbon-14 dating is kept in
use not because it works but because it is so useful to supporting
evolutionary theory, no matter how unreliable and baseless
that support is. However, as we have seen the ages generated
by carbon-14 dating are not objective or empirical evidence
of age at all but instead, like other radiometric dating methods,
these ages are merely based upon assumptions, including ultimately
the circular assumption of evolutionary theory itself.