How accurate are carbon 14 and other radioactive dating methods rowupdating new value

09-Jan-2017 05:02

This guy seriously questions the veracity of radiocarbon dating, and the fossil record.

Now regardless of his bias towards creationism and the bible, the honest scientific criticism and limitations of these widely-used dating techniques do not seem to make as much news as their results.

All the gotchas are well-known, and routinely allowed for.

Carbon dating has a well-known list of foibles including the following:* The accuracy falls off sharply beyond a few half-lives.* It crucially relies on the C14 getting expeditiously from the atmosphere (where it's generated) to plants to things that eat plants.

Other critics, perhaps more familiar with the data, question certain aspects of the quality of the fossil record and of its dating.

These skeptics do not provide scientific evidence for their views.

We don't just suspect that the rate of production of C14 varies, we know that it varies and by about how much because we can compare the C14 calendar with other calendars.

In particular, we have a tree ring calendar that goes back as much as 11000 years in some places: .One also assumes that all the sand is in the bottom of the glass when one turns it over. He must look for something in the bone which disappears over time, as the sand disappeared from the top chamber of the egg timer.