On yet another personal webpage devoted to Young Earth Creationism (YEC) we find again the same confusion, ignorance and misrepresentation of valid scientific methodology that has seemingly become the hallmark of creationists on the web.
Fee adult chat rooms - Answers in genesis radiocarbon dating
(Since then new radiocarbon standards have been introduced, such as the Oxalic Acid I and II standards, which were correlated with the original standard, and after that, standards such as the Australian National University (ANU) sucrose standard.
() work using lake sediments in which carbon compounds are preserved, gave calibration data for the past 22,000 years and found that radiocarbon ages remained within 500 years of the magnetic ages.
This still requires either a fourfold increase in the decay of C-14, or a fourfold decrease in its creation in the atmosphere or its intake by life forms.
Option one can be discarded as there is no data which suggests that isotopic decay rates vary except perhaps under extraordinarily extreme conditions, and such conditions would be deadly to life on Earth.
Actually, the later established figure, known as the "Cambridge half-life", is 5730 40 years, whereas the initial figure established by Libby et al. (What is curious are the conclusions that Scott reaches in his article.
Having dutifully explained how C-14 is primarily created (i.e.
Given that one of these assumptions has since been revised, Libby (the pioneer of C-14 dating) and his team presented strong evidence for C-14 dating.
Choosing samples with independently determined ages, such as acacia wood from the tomb of the Egyptian pharaoh Zoser (or Djoser), 3 Dynasty c.a.
We should also note Scott's caveat that this supposed concordance is only apparent via interpretation "within a Biblical framework which includes a global flood ...".
As we shall see, it takes considerably more than that to make carbon dating agree with YEC timescales.
2700 2600 BCE, Libby reasoned that such an age should represent one half-life of C-14.