Criticism of carbon dating
This argument was popularized by Henry Morris (1974, p.164), who used some calculations done in 1968 by Melvin Cook to get the 10,000-year figure. Whitelaw, using a greater ratio of carbon-14 production to decay, concluded that only 5000 years passed since carbon-14 started forming in the atmosphere!The argument may be compared to filling a barrel which has numerous small holes in its sides.That is, the equilibrium point should have long since been reached given the present rate of carbon-14 production and the old age of the earth.The next step in Henry Morris' argument was to show that the water level in our barrel analogy was not in equilibrium, that considerably more water was coming in than leaking out.This nullifies the carbon-14 method as well as demonstrating that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. One suspects that the scientific world would not be using the carbon-14 method if it were so obviously flawed.Could it be that the whole scientific community has missed this point, or is it another case of creationist daydreaming?
(Strahler, 1987, p.156) The idea [that the fluctuating magnetic field affects influx of cosmic rays, which in turn affects C-14 formation rates] has been taken up by the Czech geophysicist, V.
(The barrel is made deep enough so that we don't have to worry about water overflowing the rim.) Henry Morris argued that if we started filling up our empty barrel it would take 30,000 years to reach the equilibrium point.
Thus, he concluded, if our Earth were older than 30,000 years the incoming water should just equal the water leaking out.
Creationists don't want their readers to be distracted with problems like that -- unless the cat is already out of the bag and something has to be said.
Tree-ring dating (see Topic 27) gives us a wonderful check on the radiocarbon dating method for the last 8000 years.To that end, he quoted some authorities, including Richard Lingenfelter.