It is not a matter of whether the science itself is faulty.The reality is that the science is rather elegant in its function.After all, this what the archeologist guessed in their published books.Some believe trees are known to be as old as 9,000 years. A lot of people doubt this claim for various good reasons I wont go into here. Or are the above statements all false, and the truth is something else?This method addresses questions on the Shroud of Turin, the archaeological reliability of the Bible, reliable preservation of the Bible, and the Young Earth Theory. However, solar radiation creates a small percentage of carbon with two extra neutrons and a molecular weight of 14.All plants take in carbon from carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. A carbon-14 atom is radioactive; it eventually loses an electron and a neutrino and changes to nitrogen-14.Its half-life is 5,730 30 years, so it never has nor can be used to date carbon samples millions of years old.
Any scientist with an open mind would tell you that if these assumptions were shifted towards a Biblical view, the carbon dating process would still work, though at a much shorter time scale.Libby, the discoverer of the C14 dating method, was very disappointed with this problem.He understood that archaeological artifacts were readily available.If the earth were thousands of years old, the results of these tests would have fit in perfectly. Since the former is radioactive and decays at a constant pace while the latter is stable, the ratio between the two can determine the age of anything that was on the earth and breathed.I’m going to go through this very quickly and touch on the basics; one could write a book on this topic and still have more to say. Once it stops breathing, it stops taking in C, scientists can use this to determine how long ago the creature leaving behind their remains had died.