Start Dating diamonds

Dating diamonds

These findings are reported in the secular scientific literature (but they are usually rejected as measurement errors).

(This percentage, technically known as percent modern carbon [p MC], shows the ratio of radiocarbon in the rocks and fossils compared to the amount we find in living things).

This finding is consistent with the belief that rocks are only thousands of years old, but the specialists who obtained these results have definitely not accepted this conclusion. To keep from concluding that the rocks are only thousands of years old, they claim that the radiocarbon must be due to contamination, either from the field or from the laboratory or from both.

However, when the technician meticulously cleans the rocks with hot strong acids and other pre-treatments to remove any possible contamination, these “ancient” organic (once-living) materials still contain measurable radiocarbon.

Since a blank sample holder in the AMS instrument predictably yields zero radiocarbon, these scientists should naturally conclude that the radiocarbon is “intrinsic” to the rocks.

So rock samples that should read zero are occasionally placed into the instruments to test their accuracy.

What better samples to use than fossils, coals, and limestones, which are supposed to be millions of years old and should have no radiocarbon?

Yet diamonds have been tested and shown to contain radiocarbon equivalent to an “age” of 55,000 years.14 15 These results have been confirmed by other investigators.16 So even though these diamonds are conventionally regarded by evolutionary geologists as up to billions of years old, this radiocarbon has to be intrinsic to them.