A Few words on Carbon-14 Dating   For many of those who are new to this idea and do not know much about C-14 dating, there are many good web sites which explain how it works and the problems which trouble this dating system and those who use it.   The purpose of this piece is not to be redundant nor re-hash the same old arguments or even to pit the Bible against science.  Its purpose is to inform more on the reality of what takes place in the archaeological world with this form of dating and its use.   First off, C-14 is still very expensive to use and not all artifacts found are subjected to this method for verification so it would be wise for observers not to assume that all artifacts are automatically screened and have their exact date found.   The limitations of C-14 prevent a lot of evidence from being scanned:               “For C-14 dating the conditions are: 1.          The material to be dated must be organic 2. The organism to be tested must have gotten its C-14 from the atmosphere 3. The sample has remained chemically and physically a closed system since its emplacement. 4. That we know what the atmospheric concentration of C-14 was when the organism lived.” {Problems with Radiometric & C-14 Dating}   So artifacts made out of stone or metals do not qualify.   Second, An exact date cannot be found through this method, thus most researchers make multiple tests on the piece to be scanned and take a date that has the most consistency.  So what date is finally published is only an approximation and the reader has to factor in this and other influences like corruption and so forth. Third, most of the dating is still done by other methods and C-14 is reserved for special cases. The pottery clock is the most common form of dating as it is far more reliable than the scientific method described here {Dr. Livingstone-A.B.R.} Thus C-14’s influence on historical events is greatly limited in this aspect and should not be assumed that it has the pulse of history at its finger tips.  The past does not come with labels like ‘made in Assyria’ or ‘made in 1500 B.C.’ or any other neatly packaged product of the modern age.   When something was made is dependent upon the archaeologist’s analysis and how well they conform to the accepted practices for dating and how well they can control their own bias or theories when making the analysis. Yes there is a claim to objectivity but that claim usually comes without the controlling influence of honesty.  I am not saying archaeologists are out there conspiring to give dates to support their theory, I am saying it is easier to let bias influence a conclusion when one claims to be only objective. There are many archaeologists and researchers out in the field that do have an agenda, it is a given fact, yet if they can be honest then there probably would be less subjectivity to the field and we would have more accurate information. Is C-14 valuable to archaeology?  In my opinion I would say more No than Yes.  With its limitations, assumptions and corruption factor it would be better to have some other more reliable and accurate method to use.  Science doesn’t get it right all the time and its track record should leave the unprofessional wary of its results and those results or appeals to science should be taken with caution, not blind faith.  The problems that come with science in these matters usually outweigh the benefits as the muddy the waters more than they clear up an issue.  The unprofessional must also be aware that the quoting of C-14 dates is also an attempt by the archaeologist or the organization they represent, to establish credibility for their theory or opinion on history. Manipulation is an option for many to use if one wants to ‘make a name’ for themselves in the archaeological community.  This does not mean that all archaeologists or their organizations are this way but that this tool can be mis-used for purposes that seek to undermine the Biblical record. Caution is the key when reading books which rely and quote C-14 results.  Below are some good websites which provide some of the problems that are found in this dating system. 1.      http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html 2.      http://contenderministries.org/evolution/carbon14.php 3.      http://www.wrestedscriptures.com/c03carbon-14/carbon14.html 4.      http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/carbondating.html http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/carbon_dating.asp