Below is my response to an image which showed huge differences in the dating of rock and diamonds, in this Facebook conversation on Kent Hovind’s page. Most of this information can be found in “The Evolution Handbook” – which is an amazing little book talking about real science, and how it debunks Evolution, and proves, or at least strongly indicates Creation and an Intelligent Designer – God. I got mine from Chick.com, who also have a lot of great resources on other topics such as other religions, etc.
“Eh, what’s a few billion years among inaccurate dating methods? 🙂 Going back to my point really quick, to my limited understanding, carbon 14 is a limiting factor. The fact that pretty much all carbon based material has carbon 14 shows a young age, one reason why they don’t like to use Mass Spectrometer readings – which counts the number of carbon 14 atoms in a sample. A diamond, which would likely keep out any contaminants, should not have any carbon 14 if it is millions and billions of years old. And, the various radio metric dating methods don’t agree among each other, radically different results, and each can often give flawed answers. Not only so, but in order for radiometric dating to even be remotely feasible, there has to be a number of assumptions which must be true, which are:
1. Each system has to be a closed system: that is, nothing can contaminate any of the parents, or the daughter products while they are going through their decay process. [There is no promise that this is the case. In fact, contamination should be expected under natural conditions, especially in the event of a world-wide Flood, which the Bible talks of, and which their is plenty of evidence in support of].
2. Each system must initially have contained none of its daughter products. [There is no promise of this either, and in fact if God did create a mature universe, as the Bible says, then we should expect that daughter elements would have been created alongside the parent elements].
3. The process rate must always have been the same. The decay rate must never have changed. [There is no promise of this. Several factors can change the decay rate of any radioactive mineral, including: high energy particles from space, a nearby radioactive mineral emitting radiation, physical pressure put on the radioactive mineral, or if certain chemicals are brought in contact with the radioactive mineral. Also, research by John Joly of Trinity College, Dublin, on pleochroic halos emitted by radioactive substances, suggested that the long half-life minerals have varied in their decay rate in the past. Similar research by others have confirmed inaccuracies in the half-life decay rates].
4. The atmosphere must not have changed. [If any change occurred in past ages in the blanket of atmosphere around the planet, this would greatly affect the clocks in radioactive minerals. There are not only creation researchers that suggest there was a massive difference, but even evolutionists’ theories would suggest that the atmosphere has not always been the same. And even at it’s current state, various factors can effect the thickness of the atmosphere, and in various locations].
5. There has been no changes in the Van Allen belt. [The Van Allen belt encircles the planet, and was only discovered in 1959. It emits 3,000-4,000 times as much radiation as the other cosmic rays that hit the planet. We know very little of this phenomenon, or if it’s ever experienced any changes in the past, and such changes, even small ones, could have had large effects on radioactive substances].
6. As eluded to earlier: it is assumed that the clock had to start at the beginning, meaning that no daughter products were present, only those elements at the top of the radioactive chain were in existence. [There is no promise of this. It is an assumption, based on the idea that the Bible is not true, and that God did not make a mature universe. It is solely the imaginations and biases of evolutionists trying to pose as solid and undeniable fact, when it is not. And given the discrepancies, and these assumptions, we should assume, that they are not accurate ways to measure the age of the Earth].
Evolutionists simply pick the dates that fit their theory, and throw the rest out – but they don’t want the public to know about that. And further more, the geologic column was invented before any radiometric testing existed, using index fossils, using ages that they (again) pulled out of thin air, and posed as fact (which dating methods are forced to conform to), despite the equally valid interpretation that the layers and fossils were laid down by the Flood – which again, we have ample evidence for, which would have ruined the accuracy of such dating methods by a number of ways. Please read more about dating methods here: http://evolutionfacts.com/Ev-V1/1evlch07a.htm And here: http://evolutionfacts.com/Evolution-handbook/E-H-6a.htm . Potassium Argon dating is also discussed.
Also check out Kent Hovind’s presentation on dating methods (I don’t remember the exact name, but it should be easy to find) – they’ve gotten different results on the same samples using the same methods, have gotten several thousand year old results from living test subjects, and more. He says (in relation to carbon 14 dating I believe) that when the age is known, it doesn’t work, and the the age is not known, it is presumed to work.
Moon rocks had all of the various testing methods done on them, and some got results ranging from 2 million to 28 million years! That’s a pretty big discrepancy. Which method to we pick to be the accurate one? Keep in mind the assumptions involved.
To be honest, I don’t trust evolutionists. They don’t believe in God (or His morals, like being honest), or in the Creation account in Genesis. They have to constantly change, because they keep finding out they’re wrong, if it’s big enough news that is (sometimes they just keep going like nothing’s happened). They always have an agenda to convince the public of evolution, and to push it down everyone’s throats as fact, when it is not. They have a history or providing false evidence, forced experiments, fudging the numbers, and hiding evidence from the public. Just a fun fact, the Shroud of Turin, the most scientifically studied, and baffling artifact we know of (until the Vatican had it steam washed that is), was carbon dated by a group of scientists, who hastily published their results that it was not from the time of Christ. However, they had conducted their work in private, without the help of the researchers who had been studying the Shroud, and they had gotten their samples from a Medieval patchwork that had been done after the Shroud had survived a fire. This was later confirmed, and the test results were disavowed as being inaccurate in official papers, though the effect of the latter truth was not as big as the highly published fake results. Yet, further testing has put it in the time of Christ, as I’ve heard, and which could already be determined by various other factors. This is often the case. Such as the fake dino bird fossils from Chinese farmers, that were used for years in story after story to try to prove that birds and dinosaurs were related, and later found to be a hoax, and received one article stating the fact.”
Christian Answers & Resources 