Acuracy of carbon dating Free sex greek chat rooms

Many examples from literature show that the zero-reset assumption is not always valid.

This article will answer several of the most common creationist attacks on carbon-14 dating, using the question-answer format that has proved so useful to lecturers and debaters. Answer: Cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere are constantly converting the isotope nitrogen-14 (N-14) into carbon-14 (C-14 or radiocarbon).Living organisms are constantly incorporating this C-14 into their bodies along with other carbon isotopes.Elements can be transported into a sample or leach out of a sample.Scientists will reject theories about the age of the earth that do not conform to the norm.While there is no proof that the rates were different in the past than they are today, there is also no proof that they were the same.

Thus radioactive dating relies purely on assumptions.A further example from a lava flow off the coast of Hawaii shows similar discrepancies.If dated with the carbon-14 method, the flow appears to be less than 17,000 years old, but dating with the potassium argon method gives dates of 160,000 to 43 million years.It is assumed that we are dealing with a closed system—no loss of either parent or daughter elements has occurred since the study material formed.No scientist can guarantee that any sample can be considered a closed system unless it was isolated from its environment when it was formed.They will argue that the clock was not reset if the age is too old, or that isotopes were selectively removed if the age turns out to be too young.