Carbon-14 dating—explained in everyday terms

Scientists won’t accept radiometric dates they don’t like, as arguments over Mungo Man show.

Ways they make conflicting results tell the same story.

When the numbers don’t add up, it’s time to examine the methods and the philosophy behind them.

Russ Humphreys responds to six years of criticism of one part of the creationist research initiative into Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE).

How the explosive, 1980 eruption of Mt St Helens demolished radio-isotope dating.

Analysis of wood samples from Tertiary rocks yielded significant carbon-14 indicating the wood was only thousands of years old, not millions.

An anticreationist attacks biblical creation as heresy, although biblical heresy is an oxymoron. The response also refutes a common argument about the absence of short-lived isotopes, beloved of atheists and progressive creationists, and answers some alleged biblical contradictions.

A young supporter asks some questions about young-earth evidence raised by an evolutionary debater. The response points out some of the evolutionist’s misunderstandings and even outright errors, and the role of axioms in the debate.

If radiometric dating is objective science then why do researchers disagree so widely over the results?

Carl Wieland interviews Romanian geologist and world cave authority Dr Emil Silvestru

The nuclear reactor that began without human intervention