Introduction Many people have been led to believe that carbon dating (along with other radioactive dating methods) proves the earth to be much older than 6,000 years old.
If the dates received from carbon dating are accurate, it would be a huge problem for those who believe in the Genesis account of creation.
(Perhaps it was because of isolation and the pressure to cope with a worsening climate as the continent dried out after the Ice Age.) They, like other peoples, are made ‘in the image of God’ (Genesis ).
Then, in 1999, Thorne (not to be outdone) and other scientists from the Australian National University published a new comprehensive study on the age of Mungo Man. Bowler and Magee described this 20,000-year stretch as ‘commendable in intent.’ There was just one small problem.
Recent research on seasonal effects on tree rings in other trees in the same genus, the plantation pine , has revealed that up to five rings per year can be produced and extra rings are often indistinguishable, even under the microscope, from annual rings.
Incredibly, in the 1800s, it was not uncommon for Aboriginal people to be hunted and shot as specimens for science. The first Aboriginal settlers to Australia were descended from people as intelligent and inventive as any other culture at that time.
by Tas Walker Darwin considered the Australian Aborigines as primitive and not much evolved from the ‘anthropoid apes’.
He anticipated that the ‘wilder races’ would become extinct because survival of the fittest meant they would be superseded by the evolutionarily-advanced ‘civilised’ races.
Creationists have shown that the biblical kind is usually larger than the ‘species’ and in many cases even larger than the ’genus’—see my article Ligers and wholphins? Taking this into account would bring the age of the oldest living Bristlecone Pine into the post-Flood era.
Claimed older tree ring chronologies depend on the cross-matching of tree ring patterns of pieces of dead wood found near living trees.