Carbon Dates Are Different

Babel and Carbon Dates: Babel in Carbon Dates · Carbon Dates Are Different

How does radiometric dating fit with the Bible?
New Creation Clips | 22 Jan. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGk9nR52IL0

1:03 It can be noted, this is not just any method, this is not K-Ar or U-Pb or Th-Pb, this is Carbon 14.

Why can we be so much more sure about the halflife?

If we look at the carbon 14 content in samples from 500 years ago or 1000 years ago, we can see that it matches 0.5^(500/5730) or 0.5^(1000/5730). If not exactly, there could be wiggles in carbon 14 content of the atmosphere, at least pretty much or roughly speaking. And, from such times, we do have historically dated examples.

Why can we be sure of the original content being around 100 pmC, when it comes to something from 500 or 1000 years ago? The atmosphere is acting as one sample. Plus obviously the values.

If we had no decay studies in recent samples, like from 1950, one could imagine that the halflife were twice as long, while the carbon level has been going up, instead. For doubling the halflife, the going up would be 80 -- 100 pmC in the last 3000 years. This would cause a bulge (or deviation from real dates), but not bigger than bulges or wiggles we see anyway. But so far, no, no big flaw in the method, since the reinterpretation would allow us to have the same values in the samples.

1:31 This second one, match of geologic column with K-Ar or U-Pb dates, is moot.

Many discordant dates are thrown out. In bio-stratigraphy, as opposed to litho-stratography, there simply often enough isn't any column.

3:50 Another difference about C14 is, there is no measurement of daughter isotopes. You just measure the C14 in relation to C12.

Now, whether C14 decays to N14 or to C12 has been somewhat diversely answered over the years, I think no one really knows.

10:13 As I recall the RATE team and as you basically confirmed, they have done very little on Carbon 14.

My solution is, from the Flood to 3200 years ago, the C14 content was raised from 1.628 pmC in 2957 BC (it will be marginally lower with a more recent, Masoretic, date for the Flood) to c. 100 pmC, in 1180 BC (I have previously considered another level of Troy as the relevant one).

With my Biblical timeline, the one of Historia Scholastica, and of Martyrologium Romanum for Christmas Day, the C14 production would have had to happen at c. 10 ~ 11 times the present rate between Flood and Babel, supposing this to be Göbekli Tepe, and some more during Babel.

The increased radioactivity was how God lowered the lifespans, or part of it. It also produced the Ice Age.

With a Masoretic timeline the different levels would take a 25 times faster production of C14, or better of final addition into the atmosphere.

Another factor that would also increase the rate of production would be if it were instead of to Göbekli Tepe, to the Ziggurat of Ur, as David Livingston and Bodie Hodge believe.

This is because this Ziggurat is more recent, in its carbon dates, as well as its real history and that means there would have been fewer extra years, i e a higher carbon 14 level already reached.