For object over 4,000 years old the method becomes very unreliable for the following reason: Objects older then 4,000 years run into a problem in that there are few if any known artifacts to be used as the standard.Libby, the discoverer of the C14 dating method, was very disappointed with this problem.He concluded that the sample used for carbon dating was not representative of the cloth. Moreover, one of the chemical differences, the amount of vanillin, provided a new clue about the cloth’s age.Samples from the main part of the cloth, unlike the carbon 14 sample area, did not contain any vanillin. After a lengthy peer review process, his findings that the carbon dating was wholly invalid were published in the scientific journal Rogers' published work showing that the carbon dating is invalid has been confirmed by John L Brown, a forensic materials specialist at Georgia Tech in Atlanta, Georgia and by Robert Villarreal and a team of nine scientists at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.In particular, it describes a time when God catastrophically destroyed the earth and essentially all its life.
After all, this what the archeologist guessed in their published books.Although creationists have long pointed out the rock formations themselves testify unmistakably to water catastrophism on a global scale, evolutionists generally have ignored this testimony.This is partly due to the legacy of the doctrine of uniformitarianism passed down from one generation of geologists to the next since the time of Charles Lyell in the early nineteenth century.If the shroud was only as old as the radiocarbon date, it would have plentiful vanillin. by Helen Fryman Question: What about radiocarbon dating? Response: I asked several people who know about this field. (1.) C14 dating is very accurate for wood used up to about 4,000 years ago.This standard content of C14 can then be used for wood not associated with a historically documented date.