Radiocarbon dating wrong
The approach was a sensation when it was introduced.The chemist who developed carbon dating, Willard Libby, won the Nobel Prize for his work.Sometimes it slows down to a trickle so that much more water is leaking out the barrel than is coming in; sometimes it goes full blast so that a lot more water is coming into the barrel than is leaking out. Lingenfelter's paper was written in 1963, before the cycles of C-14 variation we described had been fully documented.Thus, the mere fact that the present rate of water coming in exceeds that of the water leaking out cannot be extrapolated back to a starting time. The point is that fluctuations in the rate of C-14 production mean that at times the production rate will exceed the decay rate, while at other times the decay rate will be the larger.That is, the equilibrium point should have long since been reached given the present rate of carbon-14 production and the old age of the earth.The next step in Henry Morris' argument was to show that the water level in our barrel analogy was not in equilibrium, that considerably more water was coming in than leaking out.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!
Could it be that the whole scientific community has missed this point, or is it another case of creationist daydreaming?(Carbon dating is already limited in scope because older artifacts have to be dated using other methods.