Arguments against relative dating
It's a great argument except for one, little thing.
The water is coming out of the hose at a steady rate as our model assumed!
The curve is roughly 180 degrees out of phase with the C-14 curve.
Could it be that the whole scientific community has missed this point, or is it another case of creationist daydreaming?
Contrary to creationist Barnes' totally discredited claims, which I've covered in Topic 11, the earth's magnetic field (dipole moment) has, indeed, increased and decreased over time.
Strahler presents a graph of the earth's dipole moment going back 9000 years.
The following material has been taken from a sheet entitled Several Faulty Assumptions Are Used in all Radiometric Dating Methods.
Carbon 14 is used for this example:, which was put out by Dr. is presently only 1/3 of the way to an equilibrium value which will be reached in 30,000 years. Knowing how faulty creationist "facts" can be, let's do a little research of our own.