And a radiocarbon result that contradicts old-earth dogma is not a good enough reason by itself to invoke contamination!
Assumptions…Assumptions Instead of arbitrarily blaming these anomalous results on contamination, a far better (and more scientific) approach would be to question the correctness of the assumptions behind radioisotope dating methods.
Because the present decay rates of these heavier isotopes are so small, the assumption that these rates have always been constant naturally leads to age estimates of millions and even billions of years.
Interestingly, however, some radioisotope methods tend to consistently yield younger age estimates than others, even when the techniques are used on the same rock units.
Virtually all fossils found within sedimentary rocks are the remains of creatures that perished during the Genesis Flood about 4,500 years ago.
Yet a skeptic might point out that the amounts of C found in these organic samples are smaller than what one might expect if they are only about 4,500 years old.
Creation scientists have estimated (based upon the amounts of organic matter thought to be contained within the sedimentary layers) that the carbon in the pre-Flood biosphere may have been 300 to 700 times greater than what is present in today’s world.
C/C ratio was 500 times smaller than today’s value, this would be equivalent to 100 p MC/500 = 0.2 p MC.
This value of 0.2 p MC is very close to the value of 0.195 p MC found within Figure 1.
About nine half-lives would have to elapse for a starting value of 100 p MC to decrease to 0.2 p MC.
Are these high radiocarbon “ages” a problem for the biblical worldview? First, remember that no detectable should be present within these samples if they really are millions of years old.
Despite this apparent difficulty for the recent-creation view, this is, in fact, a much more serious problem for the old-earth view!
One of these assumptions is that nuclear decay rates have always been constant.