Radio-Carbon Dating, scientific idiocy

The origin estimation dates of all genetic haplogroups are largely obtained by Radiometric and/or Radiocarbon (Carbon-14) dating of ancient human remains and other archaeological materials, such as tools, pottery, etc. Unfortunately, Radiometric dating of any kind is enormously unreliable and consequently, the official estimation of 35,000 to 40,000 years is discarded in my Israelite Haplogroup (DNA) Hypotheses.

Radiometric dating techniques are a precious tool for evolutionists, particularly because they make what appear to be a frontal and successful attack on the credibility of the Scriptures and the Elohim of the Scriptures. Being able to accurately date archaeological materials is and should be a pursuit of science, but evolutionists who use radiometric dating systems transform too many assumptions into unquestioned constants which in turn have resultants that (of course) figure nicely into Evolutionism's "old earth" doctrine. Any reasonable person can see many of those time-zero assumptions can't possibly be known, especially not from a scriptural point of view. For example, the makeup of elements and radioactive elements within the atmosphere prior to the Great Flood is certainly not the same as it is today. In addition, there have been Calderic events which likely damaged the accuracy of dating resultants. Note: many of the larger Calderas, such as Yellowstone, likely erupted during the Great Flood.

To see a list of many misleading assumptions that radiometric dating methods are based upon, see 16 basic reasons why radioactive dating methods are notoriously unreliable.

In the very least, we should regard such dating methods with enormous suspicion, especially when it is zealously defended by individuals who insist on such religious ideals as: "Everything came from nothing" or "All matter was always present, but then started becoming more complex matters without any Intelligent intervention."

A List of Scientists Rejecting Darwinian Macroevolution

Darwinist zealots (Priests of Evolution) will tell you Marco-Evolution is the consensus amongst scientists. No matter how unscientific the concept of "consensus" is, the perceived reality of a consensus is simply not true in this arena. Below is a link to a long list of scientists who decry macro-evolution's basic tenet.

A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism by Discovery Institute

"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

Many may ask why I'm talking about Evolutionism on a site focused on finding the Lost Tribes of Israel. Well, my genetic migration hypotheses regarding the Israelites comes into direct conflict with the Evolutionist's dating methods and the Out of Africa Theory. Because there is a fundamental conflict, I must engage in it to defend my ideas. Destroying the perceived "consensus" reality only helps in my cause.

Wrong Assumptions Yield Wrong Answers

One of the biggest difficulties in tracking the migrations of the lost tribes of Israel with the use of genetics (haplogroups) is the fact that the evolution-based theories grossly inflate time-frames for various migration routes from the Middle East and Central Asia. Unfortunately, radio-carbon dating is the instrument largely used to peg the migration timelines. But can radio-carbon dating be trusted?

Most people do not understand how different dating methods work. And many scientific articles and/or papers on various topics frequently do not reference what dating method is used to come up with their respective dates. Maybe the authors assume we're just dumb sheeple and we'll swallow whatever they feed us. Sadly, often they're right concerning what we'll swallow as fact.

I recently found a short article that explains in simple language why radio-carbon dating isn't reliable. It is called "Wrong Assumptions Yield Wrong Answers" by Bruce Malone. Click here to read it.