Study: Radiocarbon Dating Inaccurate in the Holy Land

https://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2018/06/study-radiocarbon-dating-inaccurate-holy-land ^ | 6/06/2018 | Seth Augenstein

[SunkenCiv]

[SunkenCiv]

Whoops, the source tag should be "Laboratory Equipment", apparently a specialist magazine. And this is one of *those* topics.

[Fungi]

Go back to “Tapatalk,” and stay there.

[WASCWatch]

Radiocarbon Dating Inaccurate in the Holy Land everywhere! Fixed it.

[grey_whiskers]

You sure it’s not about Jim Wolfe and Ali Watkins? He was only off by a few years, too...

[SunkenCiv]

One of *those* topics.

---

join or quit view topics view or post blog bookmark post new topic subscribe

---

• The Testimony of Radiocarbon Dating
• The Pitfalls of Radiocarbon Dating
• April 2, 1962 letter from David W. Baker to Dr. Velikovsky

[SunkenCiv]

This is about how RC dating is calibrated using tree rings.

[John Locke]

Exactly. Radiocarbon dating is inaccurate for a very simple reason: we do not know how much Carbon-14 was produced in any one year. Since C-14 has a half-life of 5700 years, even a 2% error in our estimate of production can result in a big error in the computed date.

If it really, really matters, use dendrochronology.

[SunkenCiv]

Never been there, oh, and sod off.

[BenLurkin]

Interesting information. Interesting topic

[AdmSmith]

Original article http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/05/23/1719420115

[LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget]

Easy fix. Add a +/- % before any radiocarbon dating. OTOH if you really need a date try match.com ;-)

[COBOL2Java]

It's funny; when I saw the photo of the tree rings I thought it was an article about dendrochronology. But they're radiocarbon dating the juniper trees - fascinating!

Thanks for posting!

[Cincinnatus.45-70]

Thanks for the posting, SunkenCiv!

[SunkenCiv]

It is about dendrochronology. Before RC dating, dendrochronology involved looking at tree rings, and measuring them as a way of matching old wood structures with old surviving trees of the same type, etc, as a method of dating structures. I believe its first use was actually in the SW US, in the Four Corners area.

When RC dating came along, using it to calibrate dendrochronology led to the discovery that the variable output of the Sun led to variation in the initial level of C14 in each tree ring. The outcome was, dendrochronology survived as a way to calibrate RC dating, rather than the other way around.

What Manning's done here is a sort of return to one of the past critiques of pre-RC dendrochronology, that is, that in very dry conditions trees don't add a visible ring; same kind of critique applies to trees that grow closer to a steady water supply such as a stream.

Manning's reference in the article to high and low chronologies is actually tied into the supposed mid-2nd m BC eruption of Thera, but the one thing I like about him is, he's been jamming RC dating down Egyptology's throat. As you may know, Zahi Hawass has claimed that RC dating "doesn't work" in Egypt -- the reason is, the conventional pseudochronology (which Manning is actually a part of) is largely wrong -- in the New Kingdom, only the Nubian (25th) dynasty is basically dated correctly.

[SunkenCiv]

My pleasure!

[SunkenCiv]

Radiocarbon dating continues to be accurate, and calibratable, and you're the only thing that needs to be fixed.

[SunkenCiv]

You don't know what you're talking about.

[SunkenCiv]

I don’t know why Match.com even got started — 7000 years ago the ratio was 1 man to 17 women.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3664754/posts

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks!