Radiocarbon dating coal singles dating phoenix

Contrary to the idea that radiocarbon poses “significant problems for the young earth position”, CMI has actually devoted an entire chapter in C was detected in them indicating that these coal sample are not millions of years old.This is highly problematic for evolutionists and those who want to teach that the Earth is millions of years old.Diamonds, being primarily carbon and with atoms in a tightly packed crystal lattice, are quite impervious to contamination.Yet when these diamonds were tested, we once again find with diamonds, attempt to dismiss this problem by simply appealing to the possibility of contamination by modern carbon during the testing process.The RATE coal samples were probably contaminated in situ.RATE’s processed diamond samples were probably contaminated in the sample chemistry.

Since the global flood would have buried huge numbers of carbon-containing living things (which formed much of today’s coal, oil, natural gas and fossil containing limestone), we would expect the ratio of C in samples that are supposed to be millions of years old would be extremely problematic for uniformitarians.It is worse to say at the same time that there are null results which 'confirm' that there is no radiocarbon in diamonds, coal etc. If your 'explanation 'doesn't explain the full range of results then your 'explanation' is inadequate.It is a constant challenge for scientists to produce such adequate explanations and provides much of the interest when properly pursued.But once again, where is the evidence of such contamination?It again appears to be nothing more than a convenient attempt at ignoring the evidence because the data does not fit their uniformitarian worldview.

Leave a Reply