Do you think it'll ever be possible to conclusively prove that radio-carbon dating is accurate...?

Question

and the earth is more than 6000 years old?

Or will there still be someone out there who refuses to believe it?

/got the idea for this question from perusing www.answersingenesis.com
I'm usually pretty tolerant and openminded, but I cried a little bit after reading some of the "scientific evidence" these guys say they have.

Answer 1

NO> it is very fallible. I heard that carbon dating made a living specimen older than it was>

Answer 2

Well, just remember that the earth is millions of years old. Even more possibly.
We do not know how much time exists between Gen 1:1 and 1:3 before the creation days began.

I'm out of date concerning carbon dating, but back when they did the carbon 14 rating, they never could get consistent readings.

Answer 3

Of course there will be those who don't believe in carbon dating or any other science for that matter. I don't get it -- it seems to me the more science teaches us about the universe the more it proves God exists -- even if it counters some minute particles of the (man edited) Bible at times. The more I learn through scientific discoveries the more I am convinced that the only explaination for 'all of this' IS God, the original scientist that is able to initiate and control the vast complexities that make-up our universe.
But, hey -- maybe it's just me. I'm at peace with it.

Answer 4

Unless you have proof of something more accurate, then carbon dating is about the best we have (for stuff in that age range--there are other types of dating for older stuff.) People will swallow some pretty outlandish stuff if they think it proves their point. The best you can do is just put up with their stupidity and try to gently coax them to see reason because if you yell about how stupid they are, they'll just get defensive and shut you out. If you approach morons softly and gently, you might get past their walls of idiocy. They're free to believe what they want, even if it's stupid. Just be glad you're free to be smart and hope they come around in time.

Answer 5

Interestingly, nobody ever questions a color TV, what an amazing invention it is, and that science made it possible. It works, doesn't it? Guess what, those wacky scientists and their knowledge of quantum physics, to name just once branch of science that went into that invention, understand a little bit about radioactive decay. Carbon dating is child's play compared to the hard science that went into inventing a color TV, or computer, or whatever. Or a neutrino detector. It cracks me up that some "creationist" is out there talking on a cell phone and believing that god stuck dinosaur fossils in the ground to "fool" us.

Answer 6

Potassium Argon courting dated the igneous rock in the Mt. St. Helen lava mattress to be over a thousand million years previous even as it grow to be formed even as it very last erupted. Why is it that Potassium Argon and Carbon 14 are the in uncomplicated words ones that make it into my biology e book? i'm guessing that the different ones are not precise both, because in the adventure that they were then they could likely be more effective properly popular.

Answer 7

I have to say Scientsts have provided some good proof and etc. However we must keep in mind that eveyone has their biased.

Although I like to support the idea answersgensis might have a bit of a biased when presenting information. The fact is the statistics and "facts" scientsts show can be munipulated to fit anyones purpose.

World History in the public school systems teaches that evoulition and millions of years is entirely almost a fact...

Although Religious groups can sit and poke holes in their arguments.

Answer 8

its unfortunate when people view science with pre conceived notions.

when you do that regardless of the evidence people still cling on to what they want to believe is true

I take the Mainodien aproach to the Bible

Maimonides, one of the great rabbis of the Middle Ages, wrote that if science and Torah were misaligned, it was either because science was not understood or the Torah was misinterpreted. Maimonides argued that if science proved a point, then the finding should be accepted and scripture should be interpreted accordingly

Answer 9

well, it may not be possible to conclusively prove that radiocarbon dating can be accurate to the exact second, but within a couple thousand years, or even a million it is probably pretty close, so I would answer yes to all three parts of your question.

Answer 10

There are some that will not believe anything that is not supported by or supports the bible.

See what I mean. It won't ever bee good enough for Napoleon there.