(Ham et al., page 68.) C ratio in the past, or that this is "the technique's Achilles' heel" is incorrect.The whole validity of radiocarbon dating for the past 10,000 years---the time span of interest to biblical chronology---hangs only on the tree-ring chronologies which are used to calibrate it. .) This process does not involve any assumption about historic radiocarbon to stable carbon ratios because the radiocarbon concentration in the tree-ring samples would be affected in exactly the same way as the radiocarbon concentration in the specimen to be dated. To quote again from The Answers Book: Some recent, though controversial, research has raised the interesting suggestion that c (the speed of light) has decreased in historical times. If it is correct, then radioactive decay rates would automatically be affected, and would show artifically high ages.
Unfortunately, a lot of misinformation about radiocarbon dating has been circulated by individuals who have neither training nor hands-on experience in this area.
We feel a responsibility to make sure readers of this site go away with factual, truthful information, and this requires a frank correcting of some prevalent misinformation.
(Ham et al., page 72.) As with Assertion 1, Assertion 2 fails to account for the tree-ring calibration which is a routine part of modern radiocarbon dating.
Although no convincing argument for a change in the speed of light over time has been made, the question is irrelevant to the validity of tree-ring calibrated radiocarbon dates.
This tendency to decay, called radioactivity, is what gives radiocarbon the name radiocarbon.