The approach was a sensation when it was introduced.
The chemist who developed carbon dating, Willard Libby, won the Nobel Prize for his work.
Since the 1940s, scientists have used carbon dating to determine the age of fossils, identify vintages of wine and whiskey, and explore other organic artifacts like wood and ivory.
The technique involves comparing the level of one kind of carbon atom—one that decays over time—with the level of another, more stable kind of carbon atom.
With so little water to dilute the red ink, the water’s pinkness steadily increased, but not indefinitely. Because each molecule of this imaginary ink has a half-life of 5,730 years, a point was reached when as many molecules of red ink disappeared each year as fell into the bathtub.
The barrel represents the earth's atmosphere in which the carbon-14 accumulates.
The water leaking out the sides of the barrel represents the loss (mainly by radioactive decay) of the atmosphere's supply of carbon-14.
This nullifies the carbon-14 method as well as demonstrating that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. One suspects that the scientific world would not be using the carbon-14 method if it were so obviously flawed.
Could it be that the whole scientific community has missed this point, or is it another case of creationist daydreaming?