John Woodmorappe’s books are advertised elsewhere on my web site.
These books contain an exhaustive study of radiometric dates that do not fit the results evolutionists expect.
In any event, radiometric dating doesn’t disprove the Bible.
It never will unless somehow you could go back in time and observe the process from the formation of the rocks to the present and verify the assumptions to be true.
I'm confident that we can improve the accuracy of carbon dating somewhat, but only if we acknowledge and carefully study the various factors which may play a role in how reliable our foundational assumptions are.
In order for carbon dating to by accurate certain foundational assumptions must first be true.
Living organisms are constantly incorporating this C-14 into their bodies along with other carbon isotopes.
When the organisms die, they stop incorporating new C-14, and the old C-14 starts to decay back into N-14 by emitting beta particles.
ANSWER: Can we improve the accuracy of carbon dating?Unfortunately the use of dendrochronology to calibrate carbon dating is itself fraught with uncertainties. With further research we may be able to hone the method and increase our confidence in it. Jesus, the creator and eternal Son of God, who lived a sinless life, loves us so much that He died for our sins, taking the punishment that we deserve, was buried, and rose from the dead according to the Bible.If you truly believe and trust this in your heart, receiving Jesus alone as your Savior, declaring, "Jesus is Lord," you will be saved from judgment and spend eternity with God in heaven. This would reduce the concentration of the potassium ions to the point that it would increase the date of the rock dramatically. Helens rock known to have come from the 1980 eruption (Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal) yielded erroneous dates in the millions of years.I have heard that this experiment has been done, demonstrating this effect (I am searching for the reference). Similar studies at the Grand Canyon found volcanic rocks dated at the top of the canyon older than those found in the bottom. One of the tests that has not been done on the method is to subject it to a double blind study.Therefore, since sedimentary rock is the only kind of rock that bears fossils, a relative date is estimated by the position of a sedimentary rock in relation to an igneous outflow.There is a discussion of a few examples of radiometric methods with sedimentary rocks in Creationists believe that the assumptions of radiometric dating are invalid and cannot be proven.They have their work cut out for them, however, because radiocarbon (C-14) dating is one of the most reliable of all the radiometric dating methods.This article will answer several of the most common creationist attacks on carbon-14 dating, using the question-answer format that has proved so useful to lecturers and debaters. Answer: Cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere are constantly converting the isotope nitrogen-14 (N-14) into carbon-14 (C-14 or radiocarbon).There is also an exhaustive study of this subject called the (Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth) Group, a team of six scientists who are investigating the subject in depth, and have published the first of several studies. Carbon-14 dating has limited value for evolution because its half-life is too short.The method assumes that the production of Carbon-14 in the atmosphere from nitrogen is a process that is in equilibrium, and it is not. Sedimentary rocks normally cannot be dated with radiometric methods (there are a few exceptions) because they do not have crystals that were consolidated at the time the rock was formed.