how does noahs flood screw up carbon dating?

Question

my friend said that carbon dating is totally thrown off and the world is like 6000 years old. He also says that many dinosaur species are fakes.

so if the flood does screw up carbon dating isnt it scientifically proven that there were different eras of dinos?
what does that mean?

Answer 1

yeah, so like 6,000 years old? the oldest Egyptian and Chinese reigns are older than that. that's just history. wow. i really would like to know where your friend gets his facts from. So i can warn others to steer clear!

Answer 2

Potentially a global flood could cause a calibration problem for carbon dating but it would depend on the amount of 60,000 year old carbonate rocks exposed and eroded by the flood. I would assume that it would have to be a very large amount of rocks in order to cause problems and it would only cause problems in the sediment of the flood, not the layers that came before or after.

To the best of my knowledge most if not all dinosaur species are real and existed. Each find is verified by several independent scientists, is written up in a paper and is published for peer review -- this means that many scientists all look at the finding and try to poke holes in it.

While there may be evidence of a bad flood in the Dead Sea area, and various floods over the world, there is no evidence of a global flood or even one that would have covered Mt Ararat. There is not enough hydrogen present on the earth to create enough water to flood the entire earth.

Answer 3

1. the story of Noah is a children's allegory. It cannot possibly be true. Do you have any idea how many species of animals there are on the planet!!!
2. While those whose reason is trapped by religion will give you long winded semi-scientific sounding reasons why Carbon-14 dating is inaccurate- it's all BS. Carbon dating is only one of very many ways to determine the age of objects- all of which unequivocally refute the ridiculous concept that the earth is only 6,000 years old. It's 4.5 billion years old... give or take a few hundred million. The evidence is overwhelming and now without question.

Answer 4

The only thing really faulty about carbon-14 dating is that it cant be used to measure anything older than about 50,000. anythign older than that needs one of the many other forms of dating. After that they use one of the other many types of dating such as potassium-40 which has a half life of about 1.3 billion years, well old enough to date the oldest dinos Also, water does NOT effect the levels of carbon in an organism. We are all clear on the fact that fossils themselves are not actually bones, right? Right? *ohy*
There were diffrent era's of dinosaurs. They existed for many millions of years, and survived many mass extinctions, and evolutions. They just couldnt survive the climate shift brought about by a major meteor impact.

Answer 5

Your friend is... well never mind. The Flood doesn't screw up carbon dating, carbon dating is a proven scientific fact, a mathematical formula. The argument that carbon dating is flawed is just an attempt to hang on to the god creation myth... since carbon dating effectively disproves the idea that the Earth is just 6,000 years old.

Answer 6

It is a strange fallacy that carbon dating is used to date fossils, dinosaurs, or the earth.

This is why creationists like your friend attack carbon dating by using a nonexistent fact (the flood) with some nonexistent logic (that a flood would have an effect on carbon dating), to discredit carbon dating.

Because of the relatively short half-life of Carbon-14 (about 5730 years), Carbon dating is quite accurate on once-living material (bones, skin, wood, etc.) up to about 60,000 years. That is plenty to show that the earth is much older than 6,000 years old. (We have mummified human remains much older than that.)

But to show that the earth is 4.6 *billion* years old we use many other methods ... the most prominent of which is radiometric dating using atoms with a much longer half-life than Carbon-14 ... not just 5730 years, but billions of years.

The claim that the earth is 6,000 years old is about as believable as a claim that it weighs only 6,000 pounds.

Secondly, to state that "many dinosaur species are fakes" is not only unfounded, but meaningless unless he has evidence that *all* dinosaurs species are fakes. That is tens of thousands of dinosaur skeletons! Why does he think that scientists would go through so much effort to perpetrate that huge a fraud? What reason does he give to scientists? And what about the fact that we've been discovering dinosaur fossils since the Greeks, for centuries *before* Darwin and modern evolution. What purpose did they have for faking dinosaur bones?

In short, your friend has swallowed the Creationist propaganda hook line and sinker. On matters of science, your friend should not be trusted to turn on a light switch.

Answer 7

You misunderstand carbon dating, first of all. It only works for fairly recent fossils. Other materials are used for dinosaurs. Noah's flood is a fantasy tale copied from the Sumerian Utnapishtam story, and it could not possibly have happened, as science proves. Bishop James Ussher said creation was in 4004 BCE, but scientists know earth is over 4,500,000,000 years old. You need some new friends who are educated, it appears.

Answer 8

Puhleaz. The flood wasn't a real event. Have him do the math on how much water that would take and ask where the material to make it came from. There isn't enough hydrogen or oxygen on the planet to make that much water.
There are other problems too. If man and dinos were killed in the flood where are the human bones. They should be mixed with the Dino bones.

Answer 9

Carbon dating is an example of radiometric dating. It's certainly not the only one. It's proven to be very reliable. But. It's not the only one. You always compare the results with OTHER means of determining age, carbon-14 being merely one of them. Again. There are lots of ways to determine how old a find is. When they're all saying the same thing, that usually means you're on to something. When they don't, you have to examine what's wrong.

Moron creationists (you know who you are!) only know about C14, since it's the popular one, so they attack it ferociously since it completely eliminates the possibility of a young earth. But they don't have a better method of dating. So what they're saying is, the Earth is younger than the domestication of the dog.

Answer 10

Ok, first of all, it never happened.

Secondly, even if it did, being submerged in water for 40 days would not throw off carbon dating, no. Fire does, incidentally.

Thirdly, gravtol is right, carbon dating isn't used for things that old, but it is useful up to about 60,000 years, in ideal circumstances.

Lastly, you'd have to scientifically prove the great flood, which can't be done, before you could use the great flood to scientifically prove anything else.

Answer 11

even if a world wide flood screwed up carbon dating it has nothing to do with dinosaur bones.

Carbon dating is only used on organic things that are a few thousand years old.

When you get into the millions other methods are used.