Carbon 14 dating practice problems
First, they are unexpected in any old-earth paradigm.
If nothing else, then, that should give all old-earth scientists something to think about.
First, all the standard treatment used to make a fossil ready for carbon dating was done, which is supposed to get rid of contamination.
Second, in some cases, they were examining actual proteins, such as collagen.
However, I thought the most striking argument he made against the contamination explanation was his last.
He showed a graph that ordered the samples according to their amount of carbon-14, and he showed that they naturally separate into four distinct groups.
In all cases, these materials are supposed to be millions of years old, but they all have detectable levels of carbon-14 in them.
This is in agreement with the two studies mentioned above, strengthening the overall case.
Just go to the grid for Wednesday and double-click on “BG02” at the bottom of the fourth column.
The most recent set of studies was presented at the joint meeting of the Asia Oceanic Geosciences Society and the American Geophysical Union (AOGS–AGU) that was held on August 13-17, 2012 in Singapore.
The 15-minute presentation, which you can watch here, was given by Dr. In it, he reports on the carbon dating of dinosaur bones, other megafauna (such as mammoths), and plants.
Another study showed that fossil ammonites and wood from a lower Cretaceous formation, which is supposed to be 112-120 million years old, also have detectable levels of carbon-14 in them.
If these studies are accurate, they show that there is something wrong with the old-earth view: Either carbon dating is not the reliable tool it is thought to be for “recent” dating, or the fossils and materials that are supposed to be millions of years old are not really that old. While these studies use several different samples, they represent the work of only a few scientists.