Radiometric dating is wrong difference between dating and long term relationship
Libby, the discoverer of the C14 dating method, was very disappointed with this problem.
He understood that archaeological artifacts were readily available.
by Helen Fryman Question: What about radiocarbon dating? Response: I asked several people who know about this field. (1.) C14 dating is very accurate for wood used up to about 4,000 years ago.
This is only because it is well calibrated with objects of known age.
And this big sequence is then used to 'correct' C14 dates. (3.) Even if the rate of decay is constant, without a knowledge of the exact ratio of C12 to C14 in the initial sample, the dating technique is still subject to question.
(4.) Traditional 14C testing assumes equilibrium in the rate of formation and the rate of decay.
Dates up to this point in history are well documented for C14 calibration.
For object over 4,000 years old the method becomes very unreliable for the following reason: Objects older then 4,000 years run into a problem in that there are few if any known artifacts to be used as the standard.
So when you hear of a date of 30,000 years for a carbon date we believe it to be early after creation and only about 7,000 years old.
One of the impressive points Whitewall makes is the conspicuous absence of dates between 4,500 and 5,000 years ago illustrating a great catastrophe killing off plant and animal life world wide (the flood of Noah)!
I hope this helps your understanding of carbon dating.
In fact, 14C is forming FASTER than the observed decay rate.
This skews the 'real' answer to a much younger age.