Carbon 14 dating mt st helens

The eruption (a VEI 5 event) was the only significant volcanic eruption to occur in the contiguous 48 U. states since the 1915 eruption of Lassen Peak in California.However, it has often been declared as the most disastrous volcanic eruption in United States history.In places, the vertical separation is actually very small; the new layer lying just above the stumps of the older layer.Close examination of the strata reveals typical evidence of sorting of layers, which tend to show reverse grading with the coarser material on top.Evolutionists have long used the carbon-14, or radiocarbon, dating technique as a “hammer” to bludgeon Bible-believing Christians.A straightforward reading of the Bible describes a 6,000-year-old universe, and because some carbon-14 (C) age estimates are multiple tens of thousands of years, many think that the radiocarbon method has soundly refuted the Bible’s historical accuracy.However, these excessively long ages are easily explained within the biblical worldview, and C should be present in specimens that are even a little more than 100,000 years old!Nearly anyone can verify this for themselves using basic multiplication and division.

carbon 14 dating mt st helens-6carbon 14 dating mt st helens-37carbon 14 dating mt st helens-34carbon 14 dating mt st helens-5

One can estimate this time by dividing 100 p MC by 2 repeatedly until the resulting number drops below 0.001 p MC.

First, it provides no evidence whatsoever to support their claim that the earth is very young.

If the earth were only 6000–10 000 years old, then surely there should be some scientific evidence to confirm that hypothesis; yet the creationists have produced not a shred of it so far.

Where are the data and age calculations that result in a consistent set of ages for all rocks on earth, as well as those from the moon and the meteorites, no greater than 10 000 years? Second, it is an approach doomed to failure at the outset.

Creationists seem to think that a few examples of incorrect radiometric ages invalidate all of the results of radiometric dating, but such a conclusion is illogical.

Leave a Reply