Moon rocks dating
Clearly, such huge time periods cannot be fitted into the Bible without compromising what the Bible says about the goodness of God and the origin of sin, death and suffering—the reason Jesus came into the world (See Six Days? He said, This only makes sense with a time-line beginning with the creation week thousands of years ago.It makes no sense at all if man appeared at the end of billions of years.It does not give dates of millions of years and when corrected properly fits well with the biblical flood.There are various other radiometric dating methods used today to give ages of millions or billions of years for rocks.Since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism (see Noah's Flood…, How did animals get from the Ark to isolated places? ), fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give radiocarbon ages older than they really are.In summary, the carbon-14 method, when corrected for the effects of the flood, can give useful results, but needs to be applied carefully.Unless this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages.
Anything over about 50,000 years old, should theoretically have no detectable C.That is, they take up less than would be expected and so they test older than they really are.Furthermore, different types of plants discriminate differently.So, we have a “clock” which starts ticking the moment something dies.Obviously, this works only for things which were once living.