# Carbon dating science

However, geologists know this, and would never try to prove that something is millions of years old based on carbon dating.The major mistake Hovind makes in this article relates to his claim of equilibrium.

They are, obviously, assuming the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere has always been constant, and its rate of decay has always been constant." Remember the tree-ring data..tells us how much carbon-14 was in the atmosphere at a given time.However, a "candle" can hardly be compared to "radioactive decay." These are merely empty words meant to impress his gullible readers..gives no real scientific evidence.He says "Present testing shows the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere has been increasing since it was first measured in the 1950's." True, but we also know, based on the tree ring data, that it has not always been increasing.At some point, the amount being poured in, and the amount leaking out, will be the same, thus the water level will remain constant.The original claim about this process originated with Dr.Henry Morris (he got his ideas from previous research). The rate at which the water is poured into the barrel (C-14 production) is not constant.

It varies because of the earth's magnetic field.

Therefore, the basic question which Hovind is answering is no.

Carbon dating cannot prove that something is millions of years old.

He starts out with an explanation of what carbon dating is, which proves to be adequate for this discussion.

The only notable exception is that he says carbon dating is only good for objects less than 40,000 years old. As technologies advance, so does our ability to detect the amount of C-14 in a sample.

He states that since the earth as a system would eventually equalize, then a freshly created earth would require about 30,000 years to reach this equilibrium (assuming the earth at its creation contained no C-14).