A common error involving C-14 dating

Discussion in 'Creation vs. Evolution' started by Peter101, Jul 1, 2003.

  1. Peter101

    Peter101
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    0
    Helen,

    I would like to bring to your attention some mistaken information on your (Setterfield's) web site on the subject of carbon-14. You have been shown this problem before, but so far have not acknowledged that it is bad information. Here is the quote from an article, on your website, by Trevor Major on C-14.

    "Radiocarbon dating assumes that the carbon-12/carbon-14 ratio has stayed the same for at least the last hundred thousand years or so. However, the difference between production and decay rates, and the systematic discrepancy between radiocarbon and tree-ring dates, refute this assumption."
    ------------------------------------------------
    No Helen, the above statement has been incorrect for the last 20 years. The method does not assume that the C-12/C-14 ratio has stayed the same for at least the last hundred thousand years or so. Modest errors are produced if that assumption is made, so for the last 20 years or more, C-14 dates have been corrected for the well known fact that the C-12/C-14 ratio has not been perfectly constant during the time frame for which the method is valid.

    Now my question to you is this; Will you not acknowledge that the quoted statement is in error? If so, let us know when it will be removed from your site. If you do not accept that it is a mistake, please defend the statement, because it needs some defending.
     

Share This Page

Loading...