@creationministries: What carbon dating really tells us about the Earth’s age

princedrew557 :

Radiometric dating however shows it is

Tom Bombadil :

yeah carbon dating is only reliable to about 65k years. that's why we use radiometric methods to date the earth to around 4.5 billion years.

What's Over There :

Doesn't my 1979 Honda Civic prove the earth is millions of years old?

Ricardo Olivença :

Dr wu :

Does anyone think that this guy is a preeminent scientist?

swehall :

We don't use carbon dating to figure out the age of the earth.

travelling,hiking :

absolutely right about the earth not millions of years old

spanky1208 :

the earth is only a week old. The "use by date" on my milk proves this.

Mike Teahan :

You don’t carbon-date dinosaurs at all. Carbon-14 only works to ~50–60k years. Dinosaurs are ~66 million years old. So we date the volcanic rock layers around the fossils using Potassium-Argon / Argon-Argon or Uranium-Lead, which have half-lives in the hundreds of millions to billions of years. Wrong clock for the job, different clock entirely.

David britain :

Try uranium lead radiometric dating

🫦 :

We don't use carbon dating for earths age tho

Obando.b :

U - Pb dating

Macbeth :

Oh dear

colinodonnell333 :

Good job we don’t use carbon dating to prove the age of the earth then? 👍

CreationMinistriesInt. :

For the full interview with Dr Robert Carter, see link in profile: ‘Video: 5 Reasons Earth is Not Billions of Years Old’ #CreationVids

Anaphylaxis6 :

He has no idea what a half life is.

asanto :

50k years, the maximum we can date with that tecnique, are older than the biblical 6k though, and we don't use carbon dating for earth

Bridge :

wrong question wrong answer

Fake Name :

Lucky we have other overlapping dating methods that do show that the earth is old then.

Jay :

We find carbon 14 in dinosaur bones etc due to younger bacteria, groundwater etc

Ricardo Olivença :

allyshankland71 :

tell us how lead is formed

pauljames_247 :

Multiple independent, well-tested methods converge on an Earth age of about 4.54 billion years. The primary evidence comes from radiometric dating, which measures the predictable decay of radioactive isotopes (such as uranium-238 to lead-206) in rocks and minerals. These decay rates are constant, experimentally verified, and unaffected by temperature or pressure. The oldest dated Earth minerals (zircons from Australia) are ~4.4 billion years old, while meteorites—formed at the same time as the solar system and unaffected by Earth’s recycling geology—consistently date to ~4.56 billion years. These results are cross-checked using multiple isotope systems (U-Pb, Rb-Sr, Sm-Nd), all converging on the same timescale. Stratigraphy, plate tectonics, ice cores, and lunar rock samples independently align with this chronology, making the conclusion robust rather than reliant on a single assumption or method. The age of the universe, calculated at approximately 13.8 billion years, is supported by three converging lines of evidence. First, measurements of the cosmic expansion rate (Hubble’s Law) show galaxies moving away from each other at speeds proportional to distance, allowing scientists to mathematically rewind expansion to a common origin. Second, precise observations of the cosmic microwave background (CMB)—the afterglow of the early universe—match predictions from physics about a hot, dense beginning and yield an age consistent with expansion data. Third, stellar evolution models show that the oldest stars and globular clusters cannot be younger than ~13 billion years, providing an independent lower bound. These methods rely on different physics (nuclear decay, gravity, thermodynamics, and relativity), yet converge on the same answer within narrow error margins. This convergence is why the evidence is considered emphatic: it is mutually reinforcing, predictive, and repeatedly confirmed by observation rather than belief.

Aaron Arnfield :

We don’t use carbon dating to work out the earths age