Unfortunately the ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 has yet to reach a state of equilibrium in our atmosphere; there is more carbon-14 in the air today than there was thousands of years ago. In order for carbon dating to be accurate, we must know what the ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 was in the environment in which our specimen lived during its lifetime.Specimens would then look much older than they actually are.
It's assumed that the clock was set to zero when the study material was formed.
This requires that only the parent isotope be initially present or that the amount of daughter isotope present at the beginning is known so that it can be subtracted.
We could put forward the following counter arguments to the constancy of these assumptions: a) The constancy of cosmic ray bombardment might be questioned.
The current high rate of entry might be a consequence of a disturbed post-Flood environment that altered the .
While there is no proof that the rates were different in the past than they are today, there is also no proof that they were the same.
Thus radioactive dating relies purely on assumptions.during the industrial revolution more carbon-12 was being produced offsetting the ratio a bit).Carbon dating is somewhat accurate because we are able to determine what the ratio was in the unobservable past to a certain extent.This assumption is backed by numerous scientific studies and is relatively sound.However, conditions may have been different in the past and could have influenced the rate of decay or formation of radioactive elements.Many examples from literature show that the zero-reset assumption is not always valid.