Radiometric dating is wrong

Posted by / 24-Aug-2020 17:25

Radiometric dating is wrong

If something carbon dates at 7,000 years we believe 5,000 is probably closer to reality (just before the flood).

Robert Whitelaw has done a very good job illustrating this theory using about 30,000 dates published in Radio Carbon over the last 40 years.

One of the impressive points Whitewall makes is the conspicuous absence of dates between 4,500 and 5,000 years ago illustrating a great catastrophe killing off plant and animal life world wide (the flood of Noah)!

I hope this helps your understanding of carbon dating.

He is presently employed in the Space & Atmospheric Sciences Group at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

It has become increasingly clear that these radiometric dating techniques agree with each other and as a whole, present a coherent picture in which the Earth was created a very long time ago.If you have any more questions about it don't hesitate to write.(2.) I just listened to a series of lectures on archaeology put out by John Hopkins Univ.After all, this what the archeologist guessed in their published books.Some believe trees are known to be as old as 9,000 years. A lot of people doubt this claim for various good reasons I wont go into here.

radiometric dating is wrong-44radiometric dating is wrong-89radiometric dating is wrong-3

You can find some further good information here: -- read the full page if you get the chance.