The production rate of radioactive carbon in the atmosphere depends on the magnetic field strength, for example, of the Earth and our sun.
Despite their attempts to confirm this through scientific investigation, however, the claim remains ad hoc and unsubstantiated.
On the other hand, continued success using the K-Ar system in pinning down geological events, as well as confirmation from independent dating methods, gives us ample reason to believe that the model assumptions are valid and verified.
If the 14C in these wood samples were derived from a pre-Flood atmosphere, as Ken Ham and Dr.
Snelling claim, then all samples should yield the same age.
When this assumption is used, the results are reported as "radiocarbon years before present".
It is important to distinguish between "radiocarbon years" and "calendar years", because we know that the relative concentration of 14C does indeed change over time.
Unfortunately, Bill Nye did not seem familiar with the claim, reported originally in 1993, despite my prophetic .
;) Where did these samples come from, and why were they sent to labs for radiometric dating?
One point lost by Bill Nye in the recent debate with Ken Ham was the repeated assertion that YEC researchers had dated fossil wood ~1,000 times younger than the basalt in which it was encased.
If the assertion holds, then radiometric dating methods to which Bill Nye appeals as evidence for an old Earth are potentially flawed.
If this assertion holds, then plant and animal remains from before the flood should yield dates many times older than their 'actual' age (4,500–6,000 years).