Carbon Dating DOESN'T work beyond 4500 years

am i the only one who thinks that c14 is irrelevant?lets assume the original post is entirely correct, which it is not, just for the sake of argument.1. so c14 measurements are only good for within 4500 years? so what? has c14 ever been used to measure anything older than 4500? older than 10,000, the common accepted limit?2. c14 dates matter that was once alive: organic matter. fossils, contrary to popular belief, are not organic. they are dated using potassium-argon methods, uranium-lead methods, and other methods. these, btw, are incredibly accurate.3. the error margin for c14 makes it useless for most legitimate studies anyways, because almost all of human history fits into it's half-life. it's not so good at determining whether, say, the shroud of turin was made in 200 ad, or 500 ad.4. c14 has nothing to do with biology. really. nothing. the observation of evolution, whether in lab conditions, the wild, or the geologic record (in order, mind you) has little concern with date, just progression.5. the dates on the oldest rocks are still 4.3 billion years old, from other methods, which means they've been here a lot longer than your reading of the bible says they should have been.now, this is assuming the post was CORRECT. which it is not. c14 being totally invalid or off by a bit would mess with archeology, sure. but not geology, paleontology, or biology.sorry.This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 05-22-2004 04:39 AM

eh, yes. i meant to add something to this extent but i suppose i forgot. posting on little sleep, you know. to be completely honest, it has yeilded incorrect results before, but this is usual because of other factors or improper testing. it is for this reason it is never relied upon for sole dating evidence. well, yes. duh. same with anything else. there's quotes by creationists (big named ones too, i just forget who at the moment) to the effect of "only use the facts that justify our position, ignore the ones that invalidate it"problem is, most facts seem to invalidate it. so they spend a lot of time poking holes instead of actually making and testing claims.nice icon, btw. goes well with the name. lol.