Can carbon 14 dating be wrong

Rated 4.56/5 based on 963 customer reviews

And this big sequence is then used to 'correct' C14 dates. (3.) Even if the rate of decay is constant, without a knowledge of the exact ratio of C12 to C14 in the initial sample, the dating technique is still subject to question.

(4.) Traditional 14C testing assumes equilibrium in the rate of formation and the rate of decay.

Libby, the discoverer of the C14 dating method, was very disappointed with this problem.

He understood that archaeological artifacts were readily available.

One of the impressive points Whitewall makes is the conspicuous absence of dates between 4,500 and 5,000 years ago illustrating a great catastrophe killing off plant and animal life world wide (the flood of Noah)!

I hope this helps your understanding of carbon dating.

Example: wood found in a grave of known age by historically reliable documents is the standard for that time for the C14 content.

This standard content of C14 can then be used for wood not associated with a historically documented date.

The radiocarbon dating method is based on the fact that radiocarbon is constantly being created in the atmosphere by the interaction of cosmic rays with atmospheric nitrogen.

If something carbon dates at 7,000 years we believe 5,000 is probably closer to reality (just before the flood).

Robert Whitelaw has done a very good job illustrating this theory using about 30,000 dates published in Radio Carbon over the last 40 years.

Despite this she continually uses the c14 dates to create 'absolute' chronologies.

She says this is ok so long as you take into account the correction factors from dendrochronology.

Leave a Reply