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.It is assumed that the 14C ages may be affected by the presence of humic acids originating from other (younger) organic material, e.g. Therefore, when humic acids are dated a verification of the dates is crucial.To address this basic requirement, we started some time ago to date both fractions of charred seeds, wood, and charcoal samples whenever available, i.e.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.With our focus on one particular form of radiometric dating—carbon dating—we will see that carbon dating strongly supports a young earth.
(The electrons are so much lighter that they do not contribute significantly to the mass of an atom.) C), 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.
Radiocarbon dating of plant remains is often difficult due to the complete dissolution of the samples in the alkaline step of the ABA pretreatment.
At the VERA laboratory, this problem was encountered frequently when numerous Bronze and Early Iron Age samples from the eastern Mediterranean were dated in the course of the special research program SCIEM2000 and in other collaborations with archaeologists focused on that area and time period.
If this claim is true, the biblical account of a young earth (about 6,000 years) is in question, since C 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.