# "Particle decay could have happened at a different rate in the past" **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 26, 2012, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675 "2012-08-26T03:10:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2012, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675/21 "2012-08-28T04:58:02Z")
> [@si\_blakely](#): > > Another example impacts Radiocarbon dating - the oceans exchange carbon very slowly with the atmosphere, so C[sup]14[/sup] levels in the ocean are very low. This leads to a situation where Radiocarbon dating a living sea creature gives a very old age. So radiocarbon dating is only valid for living material that exchanges carbon with the atmosphere - trees and plants, and people who mostly live on terrestrial food sources. Those that live out on the shore and rely primarily on seafood have to be dated particularly carefully, and usually dating relies on external datable material. > > Si Waitasec. Could they carbon-date _me_, for example? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2012, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675/22 "2012-08-28T06:01:59Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > Waitasec. Could they carbon-date _me_, for example? Well, since you’re still taking in atmospheric carbon, including radioactive carbon, if they did, they’d get an age of “zero” within a certain error range. The good news is that they can work with a fairly small sample; no need to take a pound of flesh. ---
**Author:** ![si\_blakely](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@si\_blakely](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/si_blakely)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2012, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675/23 "2012-08-28T08:07:35Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > Waitasec. Could they carbon-date _me_, for example? Sorry, Leo, but the chances of you being carbon-dated are pretty slim… Stick with the silicon-dating - it is what the internet is for 😉 Si ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2012, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675/24 "2012-08-28T08:14:35Z")
> [@si\_blakely](#): > > This particular position invalidates the “Creation Science” position that says that the available evidence (when interpreted correctly) shows that true age of the earth is 6-10 thousand years old. The problem for biblical literalists is that they often try to hold both positions (falling back to the “it was created old” position when defeated on the “provable young earth” position), which is a logical impossibility. It is a nice trap to force them into. I’ve noticed this before - indeed, creationism is riddled with such contradictions, although this is one of the most obvious. It’s evidence that creationism isn’t even trying to be a coherent theory - it’s just a loose collection of arguments and criticisms that individually attempt to assault assorted pieces of existing science. This fragmented nature is one of the things that makes creationism so persistent - it does not encourage, in its subscribers, a notion that problems should be resolved - instead, you just move to the next compartment and keep going. ---
**Author:** ![j666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de0a6/32.png) [@j666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j666)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2012, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675/25 "2012-08-28T23:25:17Z")
> [@si\_blakely](#): > > Sorry, Leo, but the chances of you being carbon-dated are pretty slim… > > Stick with the silicon-dating - it is what the internet is for > > 😉 > > Si That was really clever. (Or do I live in a cave?) ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2012, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675/26 "2012-08-29T02:44:35Z")
> [@si\_blakely](#): > > Sorry, Leo, but the chances of you being carbon-dated are pretty slim… > > Stick with the silicon-dating - it is what the internet is for > > 😉 > > Si You mean those women with breasts that are, I don’t know, a little off? ---
**Author:** ![si\_blakely](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@si\_blakely](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/si_blakely)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2012, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675/27 "2012-08-29T08:09:40Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > You mean those women with breasts that are, I don’t know, a little off? That’s silicone dating, and often gives a completely erroneous age reading :smack: Si [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/particle-decay-could-have-happened-at-a-different-rate-in-the-past/632675.md?page=1)