 |
Why do people ignore carbon 14 We have done many tests and it
is now fact that carbon 14
dating is able to tell age
with a small margin of error.
We have even done tests on
things that we kill and they
have come out to be correct.
With evidence, people still
insist the earth is 6,000
years old.
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
Many people prefer unchanging myths to changing scientific views. |
|
|
|
|
|
Many people do not beleive in Darwinism or evolution. They prefer to believe in a religious leader that formulate the 6000 year therory 150 years ago. Blindly they go forth and without evidence try to perseude us that they are right. Well their source the bible is full of translation errors and bad information and it is just a so so history book. While some of the information might be factual. It is only a piece of the human history. We now have evidence of Man 14000 Years ago in the Americas. So there were whole civilizations that were not taken into account by that 6000 year theory. |
|
|
|
|
|
Answer to this question not to be found in science but Abnormal psychology. Better to not waste your time on nuts. By definition (and their own admission) nothing you say can sway a faith-based mind. As long as they stay out of our way, don't worry about it (although it does get trite sometimes) |
|
|
|
|
|
Carbon 14 actually isn't very good at dating really old things (like the Earth) its half life is a little less than 6000 years so anything older than about three times that will give an erroneus age. Fortunatley we have other methods such as Potassium-Argon, Sumarium -Neodymium, and Rubidium-Strontium that are much better for dating old things. Why people still insist that the Earth is 6000 years old? They have a belief system and are either too indoctrinated, stubborn, or ignorant to take science as relavent. Everyone has the right to believe whatever they want, I only pull out the science when they try to convert me. |
|
|
|
|
|
One can't use carbon 14 to find the age of the earth. Using other radiometric methods on meteorites, the age of the earth (the age of the solar system actually) has been determined to be about 4.55 billion years. C-14 is only good for material that has organic carbon in it and is less than about 50,000 years old. |
|
|
|
|
|
I would say much the same thing as April, that c-14 dating is not a good method because of its highly inconsistent results as well as its relatively short half life. This is also why many 6,000 year scientists reject dating based on any similar method, because the results are often highly inconsistent. In addition, there are other more accurate methods of dating out there, so it isn't exactly essential to a scientist to depend on this method. |
|
|
|
|
