Carbon dating validity
Carbon dating validity - Nz phone sex numbers
Constants and Change There are other limitations in carbon dating too.
Apparently carbon dating is right up there with evolution in terms of the disdain it evokes from certain religious groups.According to some people, a literal reading of the Bible (taking into account all the genealogies and so forth) yields a creation date of around 7,000 years ago.Thus, any scientific finding that seemingly assigns an older date to any object must be mistaken—and carbon dating, critics suggest, if it is to be believed at all, should be calibrated to the Bible.As is often the case, the controversy over this topic is at least as interesting as the topic itself.Carbon Copies Carbon dating begins, logically enough, with carbon.Discussions between creationists and mainstream scientists typically have an apples-and-oranges character, much like discussions between “pro-choice” and “pro-life” advocates or politically “liberal” and “conservative” partisans.
Each side has unshakeable beliefs and therefore insists on bending any available evidence to support them, so very little real discussion takes place.For example, if a sample emits radiation indicating the presence of 10 carbon-14 atoms and we know from its mass that it originally must have contained 20, that means the plant or animal from which the sample was taken died about 5,730 years ago.Eventually, however, all the carbon-14 atoms will decay—or at least enough of them will that the amount of radiation they emit can no longer be distinguished from ordinary background radiation.Animals, in turn, eat the plants (or eat other animals that have eaten the plants), and thus the carbon-14 atoms propagate throughout the food chain.The result is that everything that is alive, or once was, contains some number of carbon-14 atoms.Creationist arguments against carbon dating (and every other scientific statement that suggests an older Earth) are extensive, passionate, and very impressive-sounding—though they are most often made by people without actual scientific credentials, and therefore dismissed (with varying degrees of refutation) by the scientific community.