Creation Science Book Review
Is the Big Bang Biblical?
Question #65. What about Carbon Dating?
Review by Greg Neyman
© Old Earth Ministries
Review Published April 2006
In the introduction to this question, Morris presents generic information which shows how the carbon dating process works. When he gets into the criticism of the method, he makes several inaccurate statements.
First, he says that by ten half-lives, 57,300 years, there would essentially be no C-14 left, and "thus no one even considers using carbon dating for this range." Through more refinements, the process is now able to detect C-14, and give dates out to 62,000 years. He is correct, however, in that C-14 is not useful for geologic or paleontology purposes. However, for some unknown reason, he then claims that "no one trusts it beyond about 3,000 or 4,000 years." This only refers to young earth creationists, who cannot accept dates older than about 6,000 years. Scientists routinely date objects greater than 10,000 years. The principle behind dating an object 4,000 years old, and dating one 10,000 years old, is the same. Morris has no justification for accepting a 4,000 year old carbon date as good, and discarding a 10,000 year old date as bad.
The method behind carbon dating is accepted by Morris, but anything older than young earth biblical standards is regarded as false. It is not the science that is driving his decisions, it is his bias towards a young earth that causes him to reject the dates. The science is sound.
Morris mentions the issue of C-14 production/equilibrium. However, this is a moot point, for one must know the production rates through time. Furthermore, he claims that this shows the earth cannot be older than 50,000 years, but this is too old for the young earth model by 44,000 years.
Morris claims that there have been attempts to salvage carbon dating, such as calibration curves. Carbon dating has NEVER been in need of a salvage operation. Calibration curves provide further proof that the carbon method works.
The calibration curves disprove Morris' final point. He claims the flood of Noah would have had a great impact upon C-14/C-12. The calibration curves provide a history of the past 45,000 years, giving us data that shows the C-14/C-12 levels. Going back to the time of the flood, there is no apparent change that can be correlated to the flood. If you want to look at the calibration charts, see 14C Calibration Charts. The dates for the flood, from a young earth perspective, range from 2300 BC to ~5000BC. Take a moment to scan over the range of these dates. If Morris is correct, these charts should show the worldwide flood event. They don't. This agrees with the old earth theory of a local flood.
If you are not a Christian, and you have been holding out on making a decision for Christ because the Church always preached a message that was contrary to what you saw in the scientific world, then rest assured that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and you can believe in Christ and receive salvation, while still believing in an old earth. Click here for more.
Are you a Christian who believes in young earth creationism? Now that we have shown the many difficulties of the young earth creation science model in this and many other articles, how does this impact your Christian life? If you are a young earth creationism believer, click here.
Is the Big Bang Biblical Book Review Home
Section 5 - Physical Science
Q64 - Is the Big Bang Biblical?
Q65 - Carbon Dating
Q71 - Petrified Human Artifacts
(23 Questions)
Section 2 - Biology (15 Questions)
Section 3 - Creation Questions (8 Questions)
Section 4 - Geology, The Flood, The Young Earth (16)
Section 6 - Impact on Society (20 Questions)
Section 7 - Personal Application (11 Questions)
To learn more
about old earth creationism, see
Old Earth Belief,
or check out the article
Can You Be A
Christian and Believe in an Old Earth?
Feel free to check out more of this website. Our goal is to
provide rebuttals to the bad science behind young earth creationism,
and honor God by properly presenting His creation.