Carbon-Dating Fossils | The Institute for Creation Research

Carbon-Dating Fossils

ICR researchers continue to look for radiocarbon in ancient carbon-containing Earth materials. Archaeologists commonly use carbon-14, or radiocarbon, to estimate ages for organic artifacts. No measurable amounts should exist in samples older than about 100,000 years because radiocarbon atoms would decay into nitrogen-14 before then.1 However, we keep finding carbon-14 in materials designated as tens or even hundreds of millions of years old.

ICR’s RATE initiative (Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth) revealed radiocarbon in coal samples and deeply buried diamonds deemed hundreds of millions of years old.2 Andrew Snelling later reported radiocarbon in supposedly 32 million-year-old wood from a Colorado mine3 and in a supposedly 116 million-year-old ammonite shell.4

Secular scientists published dozens of carbon-14 measurements from samples considered much older than 100,000 years long before the RATE scientists found their examples, but so far few efforts have systematically explored radiocarbon in Mesozoic fossils.5 I partnered with Canadian creation researcher Vance Nelson and others to report 16 radiocarbon results from wood, seven dinosaur bones, and lizard and fish skeletons removed from sedimentary rock.6 Vance acquired most of the fossils and their radiocarbon results. I added more and compared them with already published carbon dates for fossils as well as the RATE team’s ten coal samples. If Cenozoic, Mesozoic, and Paleozoic sources were deposited in the single Flood year, we would expect them to contain comparable amounts of radiocarbon. We found exactly that in almost 50 samples taken from throughout the geologic column.7

We could only find two published secular radiocarbon dates for fossils found below Ice Age layers. One reported radiocarbon in a supposedly 70 million-year-old mosasaur fossil from Belgium,8 and the other reported radiocarbon in a supposedly 505 million-year-old sponge from Canada’s famous Burgess Shale.9 Their authors suggested contamination, but neither study presented scientific evidence to support this assertion. Claiming contamination merely offers a hypothetical rescue from radiocarbon’s implications for their long-age assignments. The contamination story holds that chemicals containing modern radiocarbon adhered to or replaced ancient carbon in coal, wood, shell, collagen, or bone. What would be the sources of such contamination?

Contaminated fossils might be found near geographically or stratigraphically localized contamination sources, although there are no known plausible ways to bombard underground nitrogen with the high-energy neutrons required to change it into radiocarbon.10 Our discoveries of radiocarbon in samples from all over the world and throughout the geologic column refute localized contamination. We also compared radiocarbon results acquired at five different laboratories, ruling out lab-induced contamination.11

Furthermore, lab procedures are excellent at removing contaminating carbon, unless it has replaced the original carbon in a process called isotope exchange. There is at present no direct test for whether or not isotope exchange took place while a fossil was underground, but we plan to look for fossil clues that could indirectly test it. For example, preliminary analyses of fossil bones reveal carbon-13 to carbon-12 ratios very similar to ratios found in modern bones, despite the fact that carbon-13 is very rare. What are the odds that contaminating processes from different locations would coincidentally produce the precise carbon-13 to carbon-12 ratios that mimic fresh bones? These compelling results leave open the hypotheses that some, most, or all of the detected radiocarbon is intrinsic to the fossils. If so, then they were deposited thousands, not millions, of years ago in accord with the biblical Flood model.

Two years ago, Dr. Jake Hebert stated, “We are confident that additional testing will only strengthen the case for a biblically consistent age of the earth.”12 Our new results so far show he was right. However, more hypotheses await testing, and more possible sources of contamination need to be explored, so we will continue analyzing suitable fossils and their radiocarbon results as the Lord permits.

References

  1. Hebert, J. 2013. Rethinking Carbon-14 Dating: What Does It Really Tell Us about the Age of the Earth? Acts & Facts. 42 (4): 12-14.
  2. See icr.org/rate.
  3. Snelling, A. A. 2008. Radiocarbon in “Ancient” Fossil Wood. Acts & Facts. 37 (1): 10.
  4. Snelling, A. A. 2008. Radiocarbon Ages for Fossil Ammonites and Wood in Cretaceous Strata near Redding, California. Answers Research Journal. 1: 123-144.
  5. See references in Giem, P. 2001. Carbon-14 Content of Fossil Carbon. Origins. 51: 6-30.
  6. Otis Kline, Hugh Miller, and Kevin Anderson all helped.
  7. Thomas, B. and V. Nelson. 2015. Radiocarbon in Dinosaur and Other Fossils. Creation Research Society Quarterly. 51 (4): 299-311.
  8. Lindgren, J. et al. 2011. Microspectroscopic Evidence of Cretaceous Bone Proteins. PLoS ONE. 6 (4): e19445.
  9. Ehrlich, H. et al. 2013. Discovery of 505-million-year old chitin in the basal demosponge Vauxia gracilenta. Scientific Reports. 3: 3497.
  10. RATE research ruled out radiocarbon production by neutrons interacting with nitrogen or carbon-13 impurities in buried specimens. See icr.org/rate.
  11. We use third-party liaisons to dialogue with secular labs that would not work directly with creation scientists.
  12. Hebert, J. 2013. Do Young C-14 Results Reflect Contamination? Acts & Facts. 42 (7): 20.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Cite this article: Brian Thomas, Ph.D. 2015. Carbon-Dating Fossils. Acts & Facts. 44 (8).

The Latest
CREATION.LIVE PODCAST
Forged in Faith: The Hard Work of Making Disciples | Creation.Live...
Jesus commanded that we make disciples, but what does that mean in this modern world? Has the church gone soft?   Hosts Trey and...

NEWS
Algal Microfossils Show No Evolution
Creation scientists maintain that if something is living, then it’s automatically complex. This applies to organisms ranging from a single bacterium...

CREATION PODCAST
Rapid Erosion Devastates Deep Time! | The Creation Podcast: Episode...
Erosion takes place slowly, over millions of years, right? That's what mainstream science tells us anyway. Or, does erosion happen far more...

NEWS
Flood Solves Land and Marine Mixing Near the Andes
A recent article published by Hakai Magazine claims to reveal secrets of an ancient inland sea that existed east of the Andes Mountains,1...

NEWS
T. rex Out of Nowhere
As one of the largest predators ever at 45 feet long, it’s no wonder school children are enthralled with Tyrannosaurus rex. But where did the...

NEWS
February 2024 ICR Wallpaper
"Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another." (1 John 4:11 NKJV) ICR February 2024 wallpaper is now available...

NEWS
Evolutionist and ICR Research Both Attempting to Explain Fossil...
Recent evolutionary research is attempting to provide an explanation for why some animals became smaller over time. Or equivalently, it is attempting...

NEWS
Animal Features Did Not Evolve
There’s no doubt that animals in God’s creation have iconic features. The question is, did these features evolve or were they created that...

CREATION PODCAST
Taking a Closer Look at Uniquely Human Eyes | The Creation Podcast:...
While we might take them for granted, our eyes are incredibly complex organs. How do they work? Is it possible for eyes to have evolved over long...

NEWS
The Conserved Complexity of Eye Cell Types
The late leading evolutionary biologist, Ernst Mayr, said the eye appeared at least 40 times “during the evolution of animal diversity.”1...