Popular presentations of human evolution show a rather smooth transition of fossils leading to modern humans.
The impression given is that the dating of the individual fossils in that sequence is accurate enough to establish human evolution as a fact.
Since the morphology of a fossil cannot be changed, it is obvious that the dating is the more subjective element of the two items.
Carbon-14, or radiocarbon, is a naturally occurring radioactive isotope that forms when cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere strike nitrogen molecules, which then oxidize to become carbon dioxide.
Green plants absorb the carbon dioxide, so the population of carbon-14 molecules is continually replenished until the plant dies.
It covers roughly the period known as the Middle Stone Age (MSA).
This coverage gap lies beyond what is considered the effective range for radiocarbon and prior to what is considered the effective range for potassium-argon.
(Anatomically modern Homo sapiens fossils that are dated more recently than 40,000 years of age are not of great significance for evolutionary purposes and are not under consideration here.) There are four Neanderthal fossil individuals that are dated more recently than 40,000 years.
They are the Amud I and Shukbah remains from Israel and the Saint-Cesaire and Arcy-sur-Cure remains from France.Evolution places severe demands upon fossils used to support it.A fossil in an evolutionary sequence must have both the proper morphology (shape) to fit that sequence and an appropriate date to justify its position in that sequence.However, the real seriousness of this problem seems to elude them, even when they occasionally refer to it in their writings. In the past 15 years, the major focus of human evolution has shifted from the origin of "all" humans to the origin of "modern" humans, and the very time during which modern humans are alleged to have evolved from their more primitive human ancestors is the period covered by this gap.At least 406 human-fossil individuals are placed by evolutionists in this 40,000-to-200,000 ya time-period gap and hence are questionably dated. The inability of the radiocarbon and the K-Ar methods to cover this time period explains why many alternate dating methods have been devised to attempt to give coverage in this area.Shortcomings of a dating method in current use are not generally acknowledged by evolutionists.