What is Carbon-14 Dating?

We discuss carbon-14 dating with geologist Dr. Andrew Snelling, asking him exactly what this method entails and whether or not scientists can use it to estimate the age of things. Watch the full video and 19 more in our series "Beyond Is Genesis History?: Rocks and Fossils": bit.ly/bighvol1
Visit our website for more resources on creation science and young earth creation: isgenesishistory.com
Series Synopsis:
𝘉𝘦𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘐𝘴 𝘎𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘴 𝘏𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺? explores rocks and fossils, intelligent design, astronomy, and so much more! These fascinating segments are approximately 20 minutes each and include an incredible depth of material not included in the film. They are perfect for families, churches, schools, and homeschools wanting to learn how Genesis explains the world around us.
Del Tackett, DM created the Truth Project in 2005 with @focusonthefamily
Andrew Snelling, PhD is the director of research at @answersingenesis
#bible #creation #genesis #youngearth #science #christianity #paleontology #fossils #creation #tyrannosaurusrex #dinosaurs

[@theevolutionslayer1772]

Once you hear millions or billions of years Imagination kicks in not science 😆

[@lisamoag6548]

Just making things up out of thin air, pretending that is fact, or direct experience of the five external senses. Just talking about your imaginations is not science.

[@theevolutionslayer1772]

@@lisamoag6548 That's exactly why science refuted evolution for the simple Fact it can't exist without Faith Feelings and Imagination 🤣

[@VisshanVis]

@@theevolutionslayer1772 What science has refuted evolution? religion is the thing based on faith feeling and imagination, starting with your invisible magical mystery man in the sky.

[@theevolutionslayer1772]

@@VisshanVis I don't have a religion or a belief like you science proven Fact evolution can't exist without Faith Feelings and Imagination never refuted and never will 👍

[@theevolutionslayer1772]

@@VisshanVis I don't believe in a man in the sky neither science proven Fact we/people are Living proof for Creation created in the Lord's Image with Free Will and we have His Genetic Coding System science proven Creation by Creator never refuted and never will 👍

[@christtheonlyhope4578]

Amen and God bless you 🙏

[@chrisharris4047]

your comments stimulated interest in me and caused me to look into it further and consider these things myself - thanks

[@shannaconda3434]

These guys, along with the Answers in Genesis people(there is some overlap) are doing Yeoman's work in this area of the study of true history.

[@peterkelly2220]

I love your guys videos, for a long time I have been fascinated by the world around us and obvious signs of Noah’s flood. Everywhere I go I pay attention to the landscapes with this perspective. It’s just amazing to me and I have always wanted to learn more about the pre flood world. Thank you guys for your great educational videos :)

[@greenguitarfish]

Men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil. This is strong evidence of this as well.

[@shannaconda3434]

Right! Evil abounds in darkness but all is revealed in the light.

[@perentee77]

I actually think women love it more..

[@greenguitarfish]

@@perentee77 Well…..Eve ate the forbidden fruit first, then talked Adam into it. So….you may have a point.

[@perentee77]

@greenguitarfish Yep, but it's not just that, western society is heavily controlled by women, feminists and the activist group's they control that bribe and manipulate men in powerful positions. The more control women have the faster society goes down hill.

[@perentee77]

greenguitarfish Yep, but it's not just that, western society is heavily controlled by women, feminists and the activist group's they control that bribe and manipulate men in powerful positions. The more control women have the faster society goes down hill.

[@donhampton873]

One question to ask someone who is so sure of carbon dating is how are we to know what the level of carbon 14 was when the sample died.? We can’t know because we weren’t there. That is why carbon dating more than two thousand years is not verifiable. So in that case a young earth is a very serious possibility.

[@Tjalve70]

You weren't there when Jesus lived either, so why are you so sure he existed? Same reasoning.

[@atomicsnowflake]

​@@Tjalve70😂😂😂

[@leandrobaumgratz4079]

​@@Tjalve70 but to believe in jesus is faith, we do not claim It to be science. Who belive in an old earth should know It faith as well.

[@Tjalve70]

@@leandrobaumgratz4079 No. Because we actually have science. We don't rely on faith.

[@freemind..]

*But, surely the powers that be wouldn't want us to believe something untrue just so that their narrative appears to be right, would they? 🤔*

[@southern_merican]

u can ALWAYS trust the Government!

[@martinwolrich6464]

Yes.😎👍🏻

[@user-vf3mp6lp7d]

Thank you Jesus You make sure the truth is revealed...😊😊😊

[@NZComfort]

A system based on assumptions from the beginning that was never corrected.

[@Tjalve70]

You mean assumptions such as "the bible is the word of god"? That's a huge assumption, isn't it?

[@ronniemillsap]

Great points!

[@theevolutionslayer1772]

We/People are Living proof for Creation created in the Lord's Image with Free Will and we have the Lord's Genetic Coding System science proven Creation by Creator never refuted and never will 👍

[@shannaconda3434]

Creation is evidence of a creator much the same as the watch is evidence of a watch maker.

[@theevolutionslayer1772]

@@shannaconda3434 Right something can't exist without someone/ or creator👍

[@theevolutionslayer1772]

@@iamdead2933 Nope there's only 1 Creator never refuted and never will 👍

[@mrb.8389]

Even mainstream churches admit Genesis is wrong. They now accept evolution over billions of years

[@throckmortensnivel2850]

They forgot to mention that radiocarbon dating is only accurate to about 50,000 years ago. Dinosaur fossils are many millions of years old, so they are not measured by radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon dating is also subject to contamination, which changes the results of testing. As with all dating methods, the best way is to use a number of different methods to see whether they agree. If they agree, it's more likely the results are accurate. As anyone can find out with even a short search, all of the problems of radiocarbon dating are well known, and taken into account. A great deal of research has gone into determining atmospheric carbon-14 levels in the past.

[@Tjalve70]

Of course they didn't forget to mention that. They didn't WANT to mention it, because it would disprove their argument.

[@mmaimmortals]

When dating fossils and soft tissue, other methods don’t agree with C14 results. Then we must conclude that none of the methods are actually giving ages. if you disagree, then give the specific methods used to dare fossils and soft tissue that do agree.

[@jessemitchem3880]

How much was in them? How old did they test to be? Thank you for your work, by the way!

[@bazexo12.73]

no one ever talks about Occam's razor.

[@nelissteyn7056]

I have a question...I hope I word it sensibly and don't betray my limited understanding on these things...but would the environment/climate not mess with the measurements? For instance a forest vs a more desert place both have varying concentrations of oxygen vs carbon, varying dietary limits and lifestyle etc. would that not influence the amount of carbon a person or animal or tree might ingest over time? If that is the case then seasonal changes, geographical changes, migration changes and any major natural event would impact the measurements wouldn't it?

[@cosmictreason2242]

No. Because it's spread throughout the whole world at one time. There isn't a higher oxygen percentage in different countries for the same reason

[@greenguitarfish]

We know C14 dating, along with all the other dating methods doesn’t work because they have been tested on rocks and animal remains of known age, and got deep time dates. For instance, C14 was used to date a freshly killed seal. 🦭. It gave dates of thousands of years. Not only that, one part of the animal gave different dates than another part of the same animal. If C14 can’t reliably give accurate dates on things we know the age of, why would we assume they can tell us the dates of things we don’t know the age of? However, C14 is more accurate than potassium argon dating, which has been proven wildly inaccurate when tested in rocks of known age. It’s been proved to be off by millions of years !

[@cosmictreason2242]

@@greenguitarfish c14 is radiocarbon. You're a little confused but you got the spirit. The rest was right

[@nelissteyn7056]

@@greenguitarfish could you tell me where I can find the sources for these tests? I'd love to have something to point to as a resource

[@nelissteyn7056]

@@cosmictreason2242 could you maybe tell me what dating method they use to date ancient archeological discoveries like the shroud of turin or coins and pottery and so forth

[@JohnSmith-fj3uf]

Lake Sugitsu in Japan. Each year snow melts making a brown mud layer. Each summer diatoms settle to the bottom making a lighter layer. About 50,000 that can be cored out and counted. Reportedly within a few % the proportion of radioactive carbon matches the number of years of each if we live in a world of constant atmospheric C14 levels over a long time. So we do live in that world. So when we find human remains that carbon date > 25000 years old that is a real thing that contradicts the bible. Unless you think the garden of Eden was > 25000 years ago. So we find people picking and choosing what part of the bible is fiction meant to inspire us and what is historical fact. All that coal supposed to be laid down 4500 years ago with no C14 when the 10,000th lake Sujetsu layer has the C14 of something about 10,000 years old. I guess no flood either.

[@KingArtexerxes]

Now the real question is “What is carbon 13 dating?”

[@williamallan7915]

it has been said it is only good for 4K years, then it falls off a cliff, cant remember who, anyone know

[@cosmictreason2242]

If you read the article online from the answers book it explains it

[@krakoosh1]

I want to see the results from dating of the soft tissue in dinosaur bones

[@mmaimmortals]

there is a video on youtube where some foreign scientists demonstrate their results. it is quite impressive what they did to show the C14 was insitu, not contamination.

[@Gator-357]

It's Arizona, not Arizoner

[@TodorescuProgramming]

billions of years is the new flat earth

[@crackerbarrel6965]

Interesting. But I’m still curious as to exactly where in the Bible its states the earth is 2,000 years old. From everything I’ve read, it doesn’t state the age of the earth. For that matter, I really could care less personally. He created it all. Period. 2 billion years or 2,000 - it doesn’t shake my faith in Christ.

[@Hisgal04]

They use the genealogy in Genesis to start and dates listed throughout the Bible in the Old Testament. It's not 2000 yrs old, but maybe 6500 yrs. ❤️

[@megan1010ify]

It does matter because we have to believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. God created the world in 6 days. Those are six literal days, not an indeterminate time period. Otherwise we begin to interpret the Bible symbolically in other areas as well, which is a slippery slope. Some parts of the Bible are not meant to be interpreted literally, but the beginning of Genesis is not one of them. It's a historical account of Creation.

[@oldtimerlee8820]

The Bible doesn't give a number indicating the age of the earth. Go to Blue Letter Bible, Study, then Timelines, then choose Chronological Map to see how the estimated age of the earth was established. It's based on a number of things, including the ages of the people who are listed in the direct line, from Adam of Jesus "Family Tree". We know from Him to now is 2,024 years +/- a few years. Generally, the creationist view is the earth is about 6000 years old. Hope that chart helps. As to caring about the age of the earth, the reason why it is important is that non-believers use the billions of years as a way to deny the WHOLE Bible. That denial starts with chapter 1 in Genesis.

[@misterp158]

So, you could really care less? How much less? just saying to use the phrase correct if you use it.

[@oldtimerlee8820]

@@misterp158 Be careful when correcting others use of the English language. Some times it can bite you. You said: "use the phrase correct if you use it." Perhaps you should have said "use the phrase *correctly* if" ...

[@anjalE30]

Mankind has just now reached a millennial reign Hence why the Generation was marked THE MILLENNIAL GENERATION And they will be the LAST to grow old So be it.

[@Banishedsoulsofficial]

An inaccurate method thats only used due to its consistent inaccuracy. There is no evidence mankind can develope that will ever circumvent the Truth of God's Word

[@nlormanstuckman7408]

It’s fiction to help the religion of science assumptions

[@i7Qp4rQ]

Atheism, evolutionism, scientism. = the religion of anti theism.

[@davidgardner863]

And yet you use the “religious” science of the internet and computers. Doesn’t that make you a heretic?

[@nlormanstuckman7408]

@@davidgardner863 living and using tools has been the way ever sense Genesis bible is facts not assumptions

[@davidgardner863]

@@nlormanstuckman7408 , Long before that. Stone tools were used over 2.6 million years ago, but science created the tools you’re using now.

[@Tjalve70]

@@nlormanstuckman7408 Do you have any evidence that the bible is facts?

[@deplorable1-2]

Carbon-14 Dating? Really, really old Cougars?

[@darekradulski6213]

Since world exits only in measly thousands years,where from comes millions and billions of years? Bible states clearly that people used to live alongside of dinosaurs.

[@kevincoffey940]

Carbon dating is not accurate !!!!!!!!!!

[@lechatbotte.]

If carbon 14 is in our bodies we should date us that way. Would be easy to disprove the naysayers

[@lisamoag6548]

Proof is within the grasp, yet …

[@bettytigers]

I wonder if the people who believe the world is millions of years old will end up being just as deluded as the people who believe the earth is flat? They won't be pleased with the Bible believers, no matter how gracious we are!

[@Tjalve70]

Most flat earthers are religious. Very few of them are atheists. So it's more likely that people of the future will view religious people as just as deluded as flat earthers. Since they are more or less the same.

[@VisshanVis]

You are wrong about the Earth being millions of years old, the age of the Earth is approx 4.5 billion years old.

[@Tjalve70]

@@VisshanVis So if the Earth is 4,5 billion years old, that means it is 4500 million years old. That is still millions of years old. So the claim is not wrong.

[@VisshanVis]

@@Tjalve70 Easier to say billions.

[@Tjalve70]

@@VisshanVis Easier, yes. More accurate, yes. But it isn't technically WRONG to say millions. But let's just focus on the fact that he doesn't even believe that the Earth is that old. And the fact that most flat earthers are also creationists.

[@jjpenny1]

Science made me stop believing in evolution.

[@gs1100ed]

Lost me with the phony images of the globe

[@i7Qp4rQ]

Refuting Those "Flat Earth Bible Verses": You Should Have Checked the Context. Mike Winger Can you give such a photo showing something completely else ?

[@ronniemillsap]

dfont look at pictures then, just learn how the dating works, and the flaws within how they choose to date things.

[@gs1100ed]

@@ronniemillsap if you believe the Bible and you believe that Genesis is history, then how can you believe that earth is revolving around the sun? The sun and moon and stars were created for US. The earth was created first, THEN the sun, moon and stars. God created light BEFORE he created those heavenly bodies. There is a firmament above us that separates the waters from the waters. There is no space! Do these guys even read the Bible? Do they believe the Bible or not?

[@misterp158]

seems to me you have been lost for a long time.

[@gs1100ed]

@@misterp158 not lost whatsoever. The flat earth lead me to my faith in Jesus Christ and the truth of the Bible. I am very happy that so many others have done their own research and learned how great the deception has been. The lie of Evolution is only one of the many ways that satan has tricked God’s people and lead them away from the truth of the Bible.

[@roydodds3693]

Love the picture of a T-Rex skull as the video's header - something that no one would, could or ever has tried to date via carbon dating, which is useful for dating objects up to tens of thousands of years old. Scientists use multiple methods to date fossils and the like, just as they use multiple methods to estimate the distances to stars, so that the inherent errors in these estimates average out. This is scientific method, something AIG constantly misrepresents again and again, to quote @freemind, so that narrative appears to be right...

[@jgrahamiii7749]

Radiometric dating methods are flawed to the extreme because there is virtually no failsafe method to guarantee the purity of the samples. So it becomes a guess, but dressed up in the trappings of a "scientific" procedure that precludes any variation but the accepted non-Biblical record.

[@francismarion6400]

Just alone, according to the speed at which the moon is moving away from the earth, we know for a fact the earth isn't "billions" of years old.

[@i7Qp4rQ]

You could of tried to argue against the case the video gives....? Multiple methods is just an attempt of deflection, when basic logic from school course states, that _one_ counter example will be enough to falsify the position. + the scientific method can't be used to determine the distant padt, as it operates in the present. Observation part cannot be done. And when it can and contradicts the (sup)positions, they are ignored in order to keep the fairy tale around.

[@roydodds3693]

@@i7Qp4rQ to be honest I tend not to waste my weekends arguing with people who don't understand how science works, and instead believe in mythical monsters, demons and talking snakes. The sound of leather on willow is far more alluring now the sun is out

[@i7Qp4rQ]

@@roydodds3693 My comment is shadowdeleted yet again. The waste comes from work that isnt even shown... But as the fashion is: replying to an atheist is exactly like the classic pigeon chess... You guys _always_ will resort into logical fallacies. Here is yours: _red herring logical fallacy_ _Appeal to emotion_ _Appeal to ridicule_ (reductio ad ridiculum, reductio ad absurdum, ad absurdum) - mocking or stating that the opponent's position is laughable to deflect from the merits of the opponent's argument.

[@klolAF]

Lies

[@texanfilms]

Did not know people still believed this nonsense. Bummer.

[@imnewtothistuff]

carbon dating is junk!

[@mmaimmortals]

It’s like all dating methods. it works when you know it works, and it fails when you know it fails. It can be reasonably calibrated to known historical events, but beyond that there is no way to accurately calibrate it. The fact that it has to be calibrated at all tells you it isn’t accurate in and of itself.