A study of the problems inherent in the radioactive dating methods.

1. Problems with the radioactive dating methods: By Dr. Jay L. Wile
IS RADIOACTIVE DATING
ACCURATE?

2. What do the scientific facts reveal?
 The fact that radioactive isotopes decay at a
measurable rate allows scientists to use
radioactive decay as a means of dating objects
of unknown ages. This is known as radioactive
dating. Although it can be accurate under
certain circumstances, it is important to note
that it has some serious weaknesses as well. It
must be viewed critically, despite the fact that
some scientists may try to convince you
otherwise. We will look at the scientific facts to
draw our own conclusions.

3. Carbon 14 Dating
 The best way to examine the
strengths and weaknesses of
radioactive dating is to examine
one of the methods in detail. Since
Carbon 14 dating is the best known,
we will discuss that one. Carbon 14
decays by beta decay with a half-
life of 5,700 years. All living
organism contain a certain amount
of Carbon 14 making all living
organisms somewhat radioactive.

4. Organisms continually exchange Carbon 14
 Living organisms continually
exchange Carbon 14 with
their surroundings. We exhale
carbon dioxide some of which
contains Carbon 14. We eat
plants and animals that
contain Carbon 14. Thus,
organisms are continually
exchanging Carbon 14 with
their environment. As a result,
at any time an organism is
alive, it contains the same
amount of Carbon 14 as does
the atmosphere around it.

5. At Death Carbon 14 Begins Decreasing
 When an organism dies
the Carbon 14 exchange
ceases. The amount of
Carbon 14 in the organism
begins to decrease. Every
5,700 years, half the
Carbon 14 will decay away.
Normally, organisms that
have been dead a long
time tend to have less
Carbon 14 than those that
just recently died.

6. How does it worK?
 If we know how much
Carbon 14 was in the
organism when it died, and
if we can measue the
amount it has now, the
difference will be the
amount of Carbon 14 that
has decayed away. Since we
know how quickly Carbon 14
decays, we can then tell
how long the organism has
been dead.

7. Assumptions: If we knew how much?
 The problem lies in figuring out how much
Carbon 14 was in the organism when it died. If
there is no direct measurement of the amount
of Carbon 14 when the organism died, then we
must make an assumption of how much
Carbon 14 would have been measured. In the
case of Carbon 14, scientist assume that the
amount of Carbon 14 in the atmosphere has
not changed that much over time.

8. Prior to first Atomic Bomb
 Atom Bombs increase the
amount of Carbon 14 in
the atmosphere.
Scientists assume that
the amount of Carbon 14
in the atmosphere before
the first atomic bomb was
essentially the same for
hundreds or thousands of
years before.

9. Calculations
 When the age of a dead organism is being
measured with Carbon 14 dating, we assume
that the amount of Carbon 14 it had when it
died was the same as the amount that was in
the atmosphere prior to the first atomic bomb
explosion, which is something that was
measured. That gives us a value for how much
Carbon 14 was initially in the dead organism.
We can measure how much Carbon 14 is still in
the organism and calculate how long the
orgaism has been dead.

10. Is the Assumption Accurate?
 The age we get from this process is completely
dependent on the assumption we made about
how much Carbon 14 was in the organism
when it died. If that assumption is good, the
age we calculate should be accurate. If that
assumption is bad, the age we calculate will
not be accurate. So the question becomes, “Is
the assumption accurate?” In short, the answer
is “No.”

11. Tree Ring Dating & Carbon 14
 Through a process involving tree rings, there is
a way to measure the amount of Carbon 14 in
the atmosphere in the past. Tree rings can be
counted to determine how old the tree was.
Each ring represents a year in the trees life..

12. Carbon Dating with Tree Rings
 Through a complicated process scientists can
measure the amount of Carbon 14 in a tree
ring and use it to determine how much
Carbon 14 was in the atmosphere during the
year in which the tree was grown.

13. 3000 year old tree rings
 Scientists have studied the Carbon 14 content in
tree rings as much as 3000 years old. From these
measurements they have determined the amount
of Carbon 14 in the atmosphere over the past 3000
years. Sometimes it has varied as much as 70%
over that time period. The variation has been
correlated to certain events that occur on the
surface of the sun. We know that the amount of
Carbon 14 in the atmosphere has not stayed
constant. It has varied greatly. We know the initial
assumption of Carbon 14 dating is wrong.
Therefore, we know we cannot trust most of the
dates obtained.

14. Why Most?
 Since we can determine the amount of Carbon 14
in the atmosphere during the past using tree rings,
we can actually use that data to help us make our
initial assumption which becomes much more
accurate. We do not have Carbon 14
measurements for tree rings much more than
3000 years as most trees are younger than that.
Thus, we can only make accurate assumption for
organism that have died within the last 3000
years. For organisms older than 3000 years we
have no tree ring data to help us find an accurate
initial measurement, therefore we cannot really
believe their Carbon 14 dates.

15. Radioactive Dating Curve

16. 3000 years or younger = accurate
 The Carbon 14 dating can be believed for
organism that have been dead for 3000 years
or less. This is a good tool for archaeology. If
the archaeologists finds a manuscript or piece
of cloth, he can use Carbon 14 dating to
determine its age. As long as the results are
about 3000 years or younger, the date can be
believed. If the date turns out to be
significantly older than 3000 years, there is no
reason to believe it.

17. Important Initial Assumptions
 Radioactive dating involves a pretty important
initial assumption. If the assumption is good
the results are good, but if the assumption is
bad, the results will be bad. There are a lot of
other techniques of radiactive dating besides
Carbon 14. They suffer the same problem. In
every radioactive dating tecnique, we must
make assumptions about how much of a
certain substance was in the object originally.
Such assumptions are quite hard to make
accurately.

18. Have half-lives remained constant?
 Another assumption made is
believing that the half-lives of
radioactive isotopes have remained
constant over time. Thus, no matter
how old the object we are dating is,
the half –lives of the radioactive
isotopes in it have always been the
same. Standard nuclear physics
indicates this is a good assumption.
However, experimental evidence
suggests otherwise.

19. Studies in Flood Geology
 Based on these facts, it´s not
surprising that radioactive dates are
often found to be in conflict with
each other or other dating
techniques. In his book, Studies in
Flood Geology, John Woodmorappe
has compiled more than 350
radioactive dates that conflict with
one another or with other generally
accepted dates. These erroneous
dates demonstrate that the
assumptions used in radioactive
dating cannot be trusted.

20. Wrong Dates From Mt. St. Helen´s Lava

21. Belief Systems Cloud Inadequacies
 Many in the scientific community are unwilling to
admit to the inadequacies of radioactive dating
because they like the results- large dates. There
are rocks that radioactive dating techniques
indicate are more than 4 billion years old. Scientist
who believe in the hypothesis of evolution want
the earth to be that old. Their hypothesis requires
an old earth and radioactive dating techniques
provide dates that indicate a very old earth. As a
result, they turn a blind eye to the inadequacies,
because it gives them the answer that they want.

22. Different Mindsets- Different Conclusions
Hopefully, as time goes on, this unfortunate situation will
change and evolutionists will be more open to the
discrepancies in the radioactive dating technique.

23. References
 Dr. Jay L. Wile, Exploring Creation with
Physical Science, 2nd Edition, pages 334-336.
 Google Images: for educational purposes only
 Presentation by Dennis Molinski for
educational purposes only.