There are two reasons uncalibrated dates must be mentioned: 1) this prevents people from making up any number they please, and 2) it is for the sake of posterity, where future scientists can check the results and apply new ideas of calibration. Radiocarbon dates are affected by many outside factors. How certain are you that carbon dating is reliably able to give us dates back to 50KYA?The accuracy of the machines is not in question (especially modern ones, which are astoundingly accurate when properly zeroed in). But, any source of old carbon in the ancient environment can affect the amount of C-14 in a sample. With all that was said about the assumptions behind the measurements, about non-linear forcing functions (like an expected pulse of non-radioactive carbon at the time of the Flood), and add the two prior comments about the demonstrably changing magnetic field strength of the earth, and I submit there is a lot more "art" than "fact" when generating such dates.Examples: For all of these, and more, reasons, calibration is needed in C-14 dating. We beat this "drum" because of the straightforward historical claims of Scripture.

In this article, we will examine the methods by which scientists use radioactivity to determine the age of objects, most notably carbon-14 dating.

Carbon-14 dating is a way of determining the age of certain archeological artifacts of a biological origin up to about 50,000 years old.

It is used in dating things such as bone, cloth, wood and plant fibers that were created in the relatively recent past by human activities.

I read the scientific article on the carbon dating done on the Jericho site written by Bruins and Van Der Plicht. W., 1993, A large drop in atmospheric 14-C/12-C and reduced melting in the Younger Dryas*, documented with 230-Th ages in corals: Science, vol. Establishment of a 7484-year chronology in the White Mountains of eastern-central California, USA. And uncalibrated dates are usually only off by less than 20%.

When I did the math from their results section of the YBP, they all turned out to be right around the year 1400 . But, lets be extremely conservative and say a 50,000 years old date is off by half.

I understand calibration might have something to do with this, but then in the article it says in italicized words that the uncalibrated date “Must Always Be Mentioned”. CMI’s Dr Rob Carter responds: Anthony, As a fan of biblical archaeology, I was asked to address your question. That still puts the earth at over 20,000 years old.

But when I read articles about the results, they never mention the uncalibrated data, which could actually be correct. I am not an expert in every subject that impinges on the discussion, but I will do my best. So, why continue beating the 6,000 year old earth drum?

­ ­You probably have seen or read news stories about fascinating ancient artifacts.

At an ar­chaeological dig, a piece of wooden tool is unearthed and the archaeologist finds it to be 5,000 years old.

A child mummy is found high in the Andes and the archaeologist says the child lived more than 2,000 years ago.

How do scientists know how old an object or human remains are?