Proof carbon dating is wrong
With that said, however... Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating Radiocarbon dating can easily establish that humans have been on the earth for over twenty thousand years, at least twice as long as creationists are willing to allow.
Therefore it should come as no surprise that creationists at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) have been trying desperately to discredit this method for years.
For example, a geologist may examine a cutting where the rocks appear as shown in Figure 1.
Here he can see that some curved sedimentary rocks have been cut vertically by a sheet of volcanic rock called a dyke.
When I was at primary school I learned that you could tell the age of a tree by counting the rings.
A slightly more refined version of that lets us verify carbon dating for something like 10,000 years.
by Tas Walker A geologist works out the relative age of a rock by carefully studying where the rock is found in the field.
The field relationships, as they are called, are of primary importance and all radiometric dates are evaluated against them.
The water leaking out the sides of the barrel represents the loss (mainly by radioactive decay) of the atmosphere's supply of carbon-14.
Other radiometric dating methods such as potassium-argon or rubidium-strontium are used for such purposes by those who believe that the earth is billions of years old.
Radiocarbon is not suitable for this purpose because it is only applicable: a) on a time scale of thousands of years and b) to remains of once-living organisms (with minor exceptions, from which rocks are excluded).
I have a hard time believing anything he really says about this, but my question comes down to this, how accurate is carbon dating and how sure are we it works?
Carbon dating is pretty good and it can be checked.