Accuracy carbon dating
For more on this subject, see the video Bones in Stones i. Ogden III, "Annals of the New York Academy of Science," 288 (1977): 167-173.
Basically, we've been using items of known age to check the accuracy of carbon dating ever since the method was invented in the late 1940s.
While there is no proof that the rates were different in the past than they are today, there is also no proof that they were the same.
Thus radioactive dating relies purely on assumptions.
They will argue that the clock was not reset if the age is too old, or that isotopes were selectively removed if the age turns out to be too young.
In the study on the Hawaii lava flow cited above, it was argued that entrapment of excessive amounts of argon gas had made the samples appear older than they were.
Help us reduce the maintenance cost of our online services.
Volcanic ejecta of Mount Rangitoto (Auckland, New Zealand) was found to have a potassium-40 age of 485,000 years, yet trees buried within the volcanic material were dated with the carbon-14 method to be less than 300 years old.
This assumption is backed by numerous scientific studies and is relatively sound.
However, conditions may have been different in the past and could have influenced the rate of decay or formation of radioactive elements.
Evolutionists assume that the rate of cosmic bombardment of the atmosphere has always remained constant and that the rate of decay has remained constant.
Scientists place great faith in this dating method, and yet more than 50% of radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples of northeastern North America have been deemed unacceptable after investigation.