Radiometric dating is wrong
C14 is continually being created and decaying, leading to an equilibrium state in the atmosphere.
When the carbon dioxide, containing C14 as well as stable C12 and C13, is taken in by plants it is no longer exposed to the intense cosmic ray bombardment in the upper atmosphere, so the carbon 14 isotope decays without being replenished.
When I have asked an audience this question they have looked at me incredulously and said, “Starting time?
” They realize that you cannot know how long the swimmer took unless you knew the time on the wristwatch when the race started.
Radiometric dating of rocks and minerals using naturally occurring, long-lived radioactive isotopes is troublesome for young-earth creationists because the techniques have provided overwhelming evidence of the antiquity of the earth and life.
Some so-called creation scientists have attempted to show that radiometric dating does not work on theoretical grounds (for example, Arndts and Overn 1981; Gill 1996) but such attempts invariably have fatal flaws (see Dalrymple 1984; York and Dalrymple 2000).
Other creationists have focused on instances in which radiometric dating seems to yield incorrect results.
In most instances, these efforts are flawed because the authors have misunderstood or misrepresented the data they attempt to analyze (for example, Woodmorappe 1979; Morris HM 1985; Morris JD 1994).
In a separate article (Radiometric dating), we sketched in some technical detail how these dates are calculated using radiometric dating techniques.We note that at the instant the swimmer touches the end of the pool our wristwatch reads and 53 seconds.How long has the competitor taken to swim the race?As we pointed out in these two articles, radiometric dates are based on known rates of radioactivity, a phenomenon that is rooted in fundamental laws of physics and follows simple mathematical formulas.Dating schemes based on rates of radioactivity have been refined and scrutinized for several decades.