Question about radiocarbon dating

[KamaAina]

How is it that the fundies say it gets thrown off? I can never remember. :-)

edit: off, not oof, silly.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

1. Satan gets into the carbon and manipulates it

so that scientists are possessed and teach what Satan wants people to believe; which of course is not true, because it isn't in the Bible.

Sounds good anyway.

[nuxvomica]

2. When one of the radiocarbons has an annoying laugh

Actually, that was supposed to be a joke. I know what you're talking about and I can't remember it either. :dunce:

[liontamer]

3. I'm not sure, but the most rational guess I can come up with is

differential decay rates across long stretches of time. Alternatively, differential carbon ratios in the past?

[achtung_circus]

4. Carbon dating

is based on the measurement of the decay of Carbon-14, one isotope of carbon. The decay rate is standard. The samples are organic or previously organic matter which have absorbed carbon-14 from the atmosphere while they were alive. After the sample dies, decay begins.

The levels of carbon-14 in the atmosphere, however, have varied over time, primarily as a result of cosmic rays.

So far, mixed reviews.

It is possible, however, to calibrate the tests using, among other things, tree ring data and ice core data. So the fact that carbon-14 dating, in and of itself, has variation, is true. That the procedure is meaningless is not true.

It just requires one level of complexity that seems to confuse fundies.

Here endeth the lesson.