Books on carbon dating
When today’s rates are used to calculate ages from certain radioisotope ratios, the results indicate that billions of years’ worth of nuclear decay of the heavier radioisotopes has occurred.But there is evidence that this decay occurred in accelerated “spurts,” Why the High Radiocarbon Age Estimates?
If so, this would explain the discrepancy between the radiocarbon method and other radioisotope techniques.Yet this assumption leads to a contradiction: If these organic samples really are many millions of years old, then they should be radiocarbon “dead.” But they aren’t! Evolutionists have attempted to blame these surprising results on a number of mechanisms. Furthermore, laboratories take great pains to keep contamination to a minimum, and researchers have found that, provided a sufficiently large testing sample is used (in the ballpark of 100 milligrams or so), the amount of such possible lab contamination is negligible compared to the C already present within the specimen.Finally, although contamination can sometimes occur, it should not be assumed in a particular instance unless there are good reasons to believe that it has.Evolutionists have long used the carbon-14, or radiocarbon, dating technique as a “hammer” to bludgeon Bible-believing Christians.A straightforward reading of the Bible describes a 6,000-year-old universe, and because some carbon-14 (C) age estimates are multiple tens of thousands of years, many think that the radiocarbon method has soundly refuted the Bible’s historical accuracy.
Because the present decay rates of these heavier isotopes are so small, the assumption that these rates have always been constant naturally leads to age estimates of millions and even billions of years.