Doesn’t
Carbon-14 Dating Disprove the Bible?
Scientists
use a technique called radiometric dating to estimate the ages
of rocks, fossils, and the earth. Many people have been led to believe that
radiometric dating methods have proved the earth to be billions of years old.
This has caused many in the church to reevaluate the biblical creation account,
specifically the meaning of the word “day” in Genesis 1. With our focus on one
particular form of radiometric dating—carbon dating—we will see that carbon
dating strongly supports a young earth. Note that, contrary to a popular
misconception, carbon dating is not used to date rocks at millions of years
old.
Basics
Before we
get into the details of how radiometric dating methods are used, we need to
review some preliminary concepts from chemistry. Recall that atoms are the
basic building blocks of matter. Atoms are made up of much smaller particles
called protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons and neutrons make up the
center (nucleus) of the atom, and electrons form shells around the nucleus.
The
number of protons in the nucleus of an atom determines the element. For
example, all carbon atoms have 6 protons, all atoms of nitrogen have 7 protons,
and all oxygen atoms have 8 protons. The number of neutrons in the nucleus can
vary in any given type of atom. So, a carbon atom might have six neutrons, or
seven, or possibly eight—but it would always have six protons. An “isotope” is
any of several different forms of an element, each having different numbers of
neutrons. The illustration below shows the three isotopes of carbon.
Some
isotopes of certain elements are unstable; they can spontaneously change into
another kind of atom in a process called “radioactive decay.” Since this
process presently happens at a known measured rate, scientists attempt to use
it like a “clock” to tell how long ago a rock or fossil formed. There are two
main applications for radiometric dating. One is for potentially datingfossils (once-living things) using
carbon-14 dating, and the other is for dating rocks and the age of the earth
using uranium, potassium and other radioactive atoms.
The atomic number
corresponds to the number of protons in an atom. Atomic mass is a combination
of the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. (The electrons are so
much lighter that they do not contribute significantly to the mass of an atom.)
Carbon-14 Dating
Carbon-14
(14C), also referred to as radiocarbon, is claimed to be a reliable
dating method for determining the age of fossils up to 50,000 to 60,000 years.
If this claim is true, the biblical account of a young earth (about 6,000
years) is in question, since 14C dates of tens of thousands of
years are common.1
When a
scientist’s interpretation of data does not match the clear meaning of the text
in the Bible, we should never reinterpret the Bible. God knows just what He
meant to say, and His understanding of science is infallible, whereas ours is
fallible. So we should never think it necessary to modify His Word. Genesis 1
defines the days of creation to be literal days (a number with the word “day”
always means a normal day in the Old Testament, and the phrase “evening and
morning” further defines the days as literal days). Since the Bible is the
inspired Word of God, we should examine the validity of the standard
interpretation of 14C dating by asking several questions:
1. Is the explanation of the data derived
from empirical, observational science, or an interpretation of past events
(historical science)?
2. Are there any assumptions involved in
the dating method?
3. Are the dates provided by 14C
dating consistent with what we observe?
4. Do all scientists accept the 14C
dating method as reliable and accurate?
All
radiometric dating methods use scientific procedures in the present to
interpret what has happened in the past. The procedures used are not
necessarily in question. The interpretation of past events is in question. The
secular (evolutionary) worldview interprets the universe and world to be
billions of years old. The Bible teaches a young universe and earth. Which
worldview does science support? Can carbon-14 dating help solve the mystery of
which worldview is more accurate?
The use
of carbon-14 dating is often misunderstood. Carbon-14 is mostly used to date
once-living things (organic material). It cannot be used directly to date
rocks; however, it can potentially be used to put time constraints on some
inorganic material such as diamonds (diamonds could contain carbon-14). Because
of the rapid rate of decay of 14C, it can only give dates in
the thousands-of-year range and not millions.
There are
three different naturally occurring varieties (isotopes) of carbon: 12C, 13C,
and 14C.
Carbon-14
is used for dating because it is unstable (radioactive), whereas 12C
and 13C are stable. Radioactive means that 14C
will decay (emit radiation) over time and become a different element. During
this process (called “beta decay”) a neutron in the 14C atom
will be converted into a proton. By losing one neutron and gaining one proton, 14C
is changed into nitrogen-14 (14N = 7 protons and 7 neutrons).
If 14C
is constantly decaying, will the earth eventually run out of 14C?
The answer is no. Carbon-14 is constantly being added to the atmosphere. Cosmic
rays from outer space, which contain high levels of energy, bombard the earth’s
upper atmosphere. These cosmic rays collide with atoms in the atmosphere and
can cause them to come apart. Neutrons that come from these fragmented atoms
collide with 14N atoms (the atmosphere is made mostly of
nitrogen and oxygen) and convert them into 14C atoms (a proton
changes into a neutron).
Once 14C
is produced, it combines with oxygen in the atmosphere (12C behaves
like 14C and also combines with oxygen) to form carbon dioxide
(CO2). Because CO2 gets incorporated into plants (which
means the food we eat contains 14C and 12C),
all living things should have the same ratio of 14C and 12C
in them as in the air we breathe.
How the Carbon-14
Dating Process Works
Once a
living thing dies, the dating process begins. As long as an organism is alive
it will continue to take in14C; however, when it dies, it will stop.
Since 14C is radioactive (decays into 14N), the
amount of 14C in a dead organism gets less and less over time.
Therefore, part of the dating process involves measuring the amount of 14C
that remains after some has been lost (decayed). Scientists now use a device
called an “Accelerator Mass Spectrometer” (AMS) to determine the ratio of 14C
to 12C, which increases the assumed accuracy to about 80,000
years. In order to actually do the dating, other things need to be known. Two
such things include the following questions:
1. How fast does 14C
decay?
2. What was the starting amount of 14C
in the creature when it died?
The decay
rate of radioactive elements is described in terms of half-life. The half-life
of an atom is the amount of time it takes for half of the atoms in a sample to
decay. The half-life of 14C is 5,730 years. For example, a jar
starting with all 14C atoms at time zero will contain half 14C
atoms and half 14N atoms at the end of 5,730 years (one
half-life). At the end of 11,460 years (two half-lives) the jar will contain
one-quarter 14C atoms and three-quarter 14N
atoms.
Since the
half-life of 14C is known (how fast it decays), the only part
left to determine is the starting amount of 14C in a fossil. If
scientists know the original amount of 14C in a creature when
it died, they can measure the current amount and then calculate how many
half-lives have passed.
Since no
one was there to measure the amount of14C when a creature died,
scientists need to find a method to determine how much 14C has
decayed. To do this, scientists use the main isotope of carbon, called
carbon-12 (12C). Because 12C is a stable isotope of
carbon, it will remain constant; however, the amount of 14C
will decrease after a creature dies. All living things take in carbon (14C
and 12C) from eating and breathing. Therefore, the ratio of14C
to 12C in living creatures will be the same as in the
atmosphere. This ratio turns out to be about one 14C atom for
every 1 trillion 12C atoms. Scientists can use this ratio to
help determine the starting amount of 14C.
When an
organism dies, this ratio (1 to 1 trillion) will begin to change. The amount of 12C
will remain constant, but the amount of 14C will become less
and less. The smaller the ratio, the longer the organism has been dead. The
following illustration demonstrates how the age is estimated using this ratio.
Percent 14C
Remaining
|
Percent 12C
Remaining
|
Ratio
|
Number of
Half-Lives
|
Years Dead(Age of
Fossil)
|
100
|
100
|
1 to 1T
|
0
|
0
|
50
|
100
|
1 to 2T
|
1
|
5,730
|
25
|
100
|
1 to 4T
|
2
|
11,460
|
12.5
|
100
|
1 to 8T
|
3
|
17,190
|
6.25
|
100
|
1 to 16T
|
4
|
22,920
|
3.125
|
100
|
1 to 32T
|
5
|
28,650
|
T =
Trillion
A Critical
Assumption
A
critical assumption used in carbon-14 dating has to do with this ratio. It is
assumed that the ratio of 14C to 12C in the
atmosphere has always been the same as it is today (1 to 1 trillion). If this
assumption is true, then the AMS 14C dating method is valid up
to about 80,000 years. Beyond this number, the instruments scientists use would
not be able to detect enough remaining 14C to be useful in age
estimates. This is a critical assumption in the dating process. If this
assumption is not true, then the method will give incorrect dates. What could
cause this ratio to change? If the production rate of 14C in
the atmosphere is not equal to the removal rate (mostly through decay), this
ratio will change. In other words, the amount of 14C being
produced in the atmosphere must equal the amount being removed to be in a
steady state (also called “equilibrium”). If this is not true, the ratio of 14C
to 12C is not a constant, which would make knowing the starting
amount of 14C in a specimen difficult or impossible to
accurately determine.
Dr.
Willard Libby, the founder of the carbon-14 dating method, assumed this ratio
to be constant. His reasoning was based on a belief in evolution, which assumes
the earth must be billions of years old. Assumptions in the scientific
community are extremely important. If the starting assumption is false, all the
calculations based on that assumption might be correct but still give a wrong
conclusion.
In Dr.
Libby’s original work, he noted that the atmosphere did not appear to be in
equilibrium. This was a troubling idea for Dr. Libby since he believed the
world was billions of years old and enough time had passed to achieve
equilibrium. Dr. Libby’s calculations showed that if the earth started with no 14C
in the atmosphere, it would take up to 30,000 years to build up to a steady
state (equilibrium).
If the cosmic radiation has
remained at its present intensity for 20,000 or 30,000 years, and if the carbon
reservoir has not changed appreciably in this time, then there exists at the
present time a complete balance between the rate of disintegration of
radiocarbon atoms and the rate of assimilation of new radiocarbon atoms for all
material in the life-cycle.2
Dr. Libby
chose to ignore this discrepancy (nonequilibrium state), and he attributed it
to experimental error. However, the discrepancy has turned out to be very real.
The ratio of 14C /12C is not constant.
The Specific Production
Rate (SPR) of C-14 is known to be 18.8 atoms per gram of total carbon per
minute. The Specific Decay Rate (SDR) is known to be only 16.1 disintegrations
per gram per minute.3
What does
this mean? If it takes about 30,000 years to reach equilibrium and 14C
is still out of equilibrium, then maybe the earth is not very old.
Magnetic Field of
the Earth
Other
factors can affect the production rate of 14C in the
atmosphere. The earth has a magnetic field around it which helps protect us
from harmful radiation from outer space. This magnetic field is decaying
(getting weaker). The stronger the field is around the earth, the fewer the
number of cosmic rays that are able to reach the atmosphere. This would result
in a smaller production of14C in the atmosphere in earth’s past.
The cause for the long term
variation of the C-14 level is not known. The variation is certainly partially
the result of a change in the cosmic ray production rate of radiocarbon. The
cosmic-ray flux, and hence the production rate of C-14, is a function not only
of the solar activity but also of the magnetic dipole moment of the Earth.4
Though complex, this
history of the earth’s magnetic field agrees with Barnes’ basic hypothesis,
that the field has always freely decayed.... The field has always been losing
energy despite its variations, so it cannot be more than 10,000 years old.5
Earth’s magnetic field is
fading. Today it is about 10 percent weaker than it was when German
mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss started keeping tabs on it in 1845,
scientists say.6
If the
production rate of 14C in the atmosphere was less in the past,
dates given using the carbon-14 method would incorrectly assume that more 14C
had decayed out of a specimen than what has actually occurred. This would
result in giving older dates than the true age.
Genesis Flood
What role
might the Genesis Flood have played in the amount
of carbon? The Flood would have buried large amounts of carbon from living
organisms (plant and animal) to form today’s fossil fuels (coal, oil, etc.).
The amount of fossil fuels indicates there must have been a vastly larger
quantity of vegetation in existence prior to the Flood than exists today. This
means that the biosphere just prior to the Flood might have had 500 times more
carbon in living organisms than today. This would further dilute the amount of 14C
and cause the 14C/12C ratio to be much smaller than
today.
If that were the case, and
this C-14 were distributed uniformly throughout the biosphere, and the total
amount of biosphere C were, for example, 500 times that of today’s world, the
resulting C-14/C-12 ratio would be 1/500 of today’s level....7
When the
Flood is taken into account along with the decay of the magnetic field, it is
reasonable to believe that the assumption of equilibrium is a false assumption.
Because
of this false assumption, any age estimates using 14C prior to
the Flood will give much older dates than the true age. Pre-Flood material
would be dated at perhaps ten times the true age.
The RATE Group
Findings
In 1997
an eight-year research project was started to investigate the age of the earth.
The group was called the RATE group (Radioisotopes and the Age of
The Earth). The team of scientists included:
§ Larry Vardiman, PhD Atmospheric Science
§ Russell Humphreys, PhD Physics
§ Eugene
Chaffin, PhD Physics
§ John Baumgardner, PhD Geophysics
§ Donald DeYoung, PhD Physics
§ Steven Austin, PhD Geology
§ Andrew Snelling, PhD Geology
§ Steven Boyd, PhD Hebraic and Cognate
Studies
The
objective was to gather data commonly ignored or censored by evolutionary
standards of dating. The scientists reviewed the assumptions and procedures
used in estimating the ages of rocks and fossils. The results of the carbon-14
dating demonstrated serious problems for long geologic ages. For example, a
series of fossilized wood samples that conventionally have been dated according
to their host strata to be from Tertiary to Permian (40-250 million years old)
all yielded significant, detectable levels of carbon-14 that would
conventionally equate to only 30,000-45,000 years “ages” for the original
trees.8 Similarly,
a survey of the conventional radiocarbon journals resulted in more than forty
examples of supposedly ancient organic materials, including limestones, that
contained carbon-14, as reported by leading laboratories.9
Samples
were then taken from ten different coal layers that, according to evolutionists,
represent different time periods in the geologic column (Cenozoic, Mesozoic,
and Paleozoic). The RATE group obtained these ten coal samples from the U.S.
Department of Energy Coal Sample Bank, from samples collected from major
coalfields across the United States. The chosen coal samples, which dated
millions to hundreds of millions of years old based on standard evolution time
estimates, all contained measurable amounts of 14C. In all cases, careful
precautions were taken to eliminate any possibility of contamination from other
sources. Samples, in all three “time periods”, displayed significant amounts of
14C. This is a significant discovery. Since the half-life of 14C is relatively
short (5,730 years), there should be no detectable 14C left after about 100,000
years. The average 14C estimated age for all the layers from these three time
periods was approximately 50,000 years. However, using a more realistic
pre-Flood 14C /12C ratio reduces that age to about 5,000 years.
These
results indicate that the entire geologic column is less than 100,000 years
old—and could be much younger. This confirms the Bible and challenges the evolutionary
idea of long geologic ages.
Because the lifetime of
C-14 is so brief, these AMS [Accelerator Mass Spectrometer] measurements pose
an obvious challenge to the standard geological timescale that assigns millions
to hundreds of millions of years to this part of the rock layer.10
Another
noteworthy observation from the RATE group was the amount of 14C
found in diamonds. Secular scientists have estimated the ages of diamonds to be
millions to billions of years old using other radiometric dating methods. These
methods are also based on questionable assumptions and are discussed elsewhere11.
Because of their hardness, diamonds (the hardest known substance) are extremely
resistant to contamination through chemical exchange. Since diamonds are
considered to be so old by evolutionary standards, finding any 14C
in them would be strong support for a recent creation.
The RATE
group analyzed twelve diamond samples for possible carbon-14 content. Similar
to the coal results, all twelve diamond samples contained detectable, but lower
levels of 14C. These findings are powerful evidence that coal
and diamonds cannot be the millions or billions of years old that evolutionists
claim. Indeed, these RATE findings of detectable 14C in
diamonds have been confirmed independently.12 Carbon-14
found in fossils at all layers of the geologic column, in coal and in diamonds,
is evidence which confirms the biblical timescale of thousands of years and not
billions.
Because of C-14’s short
half-life, such a finding would argue that carbon and probably the entire
physical earth as well must have a recent origin.13
Conclusion
All
radiometric dating methods are based on assumptions about events that happened
in the past. If the assumptions are accepted as true (as is typically done in
the evolutionary dating processes), results can be biased toward a desired age.
In the reported ages given in textbooks and other journals, these evolutionary
assumptions have not been questioned, while results inconsistent with long ages
have been censored. When the assumptions were evaluated and shown faulty, the
results supported the biblical account of a global Flood and young earth.
Christians should not be afraid of radiometric dating methods. Carbon-14 dating
is really the friend of Christians, and it supports a young earth.
The RATE scientists are
convinced that the popular idea attributed to geologist Charles Lyell from
nearly two centuries ago, “The present is the key to the past,” is simply not
valid for an earth history of millions or billions of years. An alternative
interpretation of the carbon-14 data is that the earth experienced a global
flood catastrophe which laid down most of the rock strata and fossils....
Whatever the source of the carbon-14, its presence in nearly every sample
tested worldwide is a strong challenge to an ancient age. Carbon-14 data is now
firmly on the side of the young-earth view of history.14
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-c14-disprove-the-bible?utm_source=aigsocial01152013carbon&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebook
Help keep these daily
articles coming. Support AiG.
Footnotes
4. M. Stuiver and H. Suess, On the
relationship between radiocarbon dates and true sample ages, Radiocarbon,
Vol. 8, 1966, 535. Back
5. R. Humphreys, The mystery of earth’s
magnetic field, ICR Impact, Feb 1, 1989. www.icr.org/article/292. Back
7. J. Baumgarder, C-14 evidence for a
recent global Flood and a young earth, Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, Vol. 2, Institute for Creation Research,
Santee, California, 2005, 618. Back
8. A.A. Snelling, Radioactive “dating” in
conflict! Fossil wood in ancient lava flow yields radiocarbon, Creation
Ex Nihilo 20(1):24–27, 1997. A.A. Snelling, Stumping old-age
dogma: Radiocarbon in an “ancient” fossil tree stump casts doubt on traditional
rock/fossil dating,Creation Ex Nihilo 20(4):48–51, 1998.
A.A. Snelling, Dating dilemma: Fossil wood in ancient sandstone: Creation
Ex Nihilo 21(3):39–41, 1992. A.A. Snelling, Geological
conflict: Young radiocarbon date for ancient fossil wood challenges fossil
dating, Creation Ex Nihilo22(2):44–47, 2000. A.A. Snelling,
Conflicting “ages” of Tertiary basalt and contained fossilized wood, Crinum,
central Queensland, Australia, Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal14(2):99–122,
2000. Back
12. M. Riddle, Does radiometric dating
prove the earth is old?, in K.A. Ham (Ed.), The New Answers Book,
Master Books, Green Forest, Arkansas, pp. 113–124, 2006. Back
13. R.E. Taylor, and J. Southon, Use of
natural diamonds to monitor 14C AMS instrument backgrounds, Nuclear
Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 259:282–287,
2007.Back
No comments:
Post a Comment