Posted on 08/16/2018 12:54:34 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
...by resolving discrepancies between archeological and radiocarbon methods of dating the eruption, according to new University of Arizona-led research... "It's about tying together a timeline of ancient Egypt, Greece, Turkey and the rest of the Mediterranean at this critical point in the ancient world -- that's what dating Thera can do," said lead author Charlotte Pearson, an assistant professor of dendrochronology at the UA Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research...
Archeologists have estimated the eruption as occurring sometime between 1570 and 1500 BC by using human artifacts such as written records from Egypt and pottery retrieved from digs. Other researchers estimated the date of the eruption to about 1600 BC using measurements of radiocarbon, sometimes called carbon-14, from bits of trees, grains and legumes found just below the layer of volcanic ash.
By using radiocarbon measurements from the annual rings of trees that lived at the time of the eruption, the UA-led team dates the eruption to someplace between 1600 and 1525, a time period which overlaps with the 1570-1500 date range from the archeological evidence...
Co-author Gregory Hodgins, director of the UA AMS lab, said, "Charlotte's redoing the calibration curve at an annual scale. What fell out of that was that the old calibration curve wasn't precisely correct during this time frame."
...Her other UA co-authors are Peter Brewer, Timothy Jull, Todd Lange and Matthew Salzer. Other co-authors are David Brown of Queen's University in Belfast, UK, and Timothy Heaton of University of Sheffield, UK...
Other research teams are also finding discrepancies between their radiocarbon measurements using annual tree rings and the current radiocarbon calibration curve, he said.
Pearson... hopes future research can nail the eruption down to a particular year.
(Excerpt) Read more at uanews.arizona.edu ...
Perhaps Clovis, Atlantis and Noah’s Ark are all the same?
Some day we’ll know.
Perhaps Clovis, Atlantis and Noah’s Ark are all the same? Some day we’ll know.
We know that one right now. No. :^)
So they eventually match it up with a tree they can actually date? Seems like a lot of error might be able to creep in with this methodology. “Wiggle matching” seems like an art form.
It has to do with the sequence of dates for the individual rings — they’ll be in the same order, that’s why the overlap works.
amusing aside:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1563039/posts?page=8#8
Here's some additional BS -- contrary to the article, the eruption wasn't the largest in human history (not least because it's imaginary), didn't occur around 4,000 years ago (not least, well you get it), it didn't bury "Akrotiri and the Minoan settlement on Crete" (those two are one thing, btw) "in 40 meters of ash and rock" (it was just a few meters; compare this to ten or so meters of ash that buried Pompeii in 79 AD), it ddn't send massive tsunamis or cause devastating rainstorms, and the "reference date of 1600 BC" is not the result of written records (zero of those), bits of pottery (even in the conventional chronology the date is no earlier than 1500 BC), or radiocarbon dating (Sturt Manning claims 1620 BC; most recently he's been trying to build a fudge factor into certain eastern Med dendrochronology results, in order to play ball with the dug in heels set who continue to defend the conventional pseudochronology).
BTW, as an aside -- It has already been shown that living plants growing in the ash have centuries-old RC dates because their 'diet' consists overwhelmingly of old carbon in the soil.
New study aims to determine exact date of Santorini Volcano eruption by GCT
... In the chapter dealing with the sack of the Temple of Jerusalem, it was demonstrated that the biblical Shishak, its plunderer, was Thutmose III of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and the objects of his loot, depicted on the bas relief at Karnak, were identified as the vessels, utensils, and furniture of the Temple. His heir Amenhotep II was identified as the Biblical Zerah who invaded Palestine in the days of King Asa at the beginning of the ninth century. Thus they could not have been the Libyan kings Shoshenk and Osorkon. These Libyans reigned later, and the entire duration of that dynasty was shorter than is conventionally assumed. But we shall also show that Osorkon could not have reigned in the beginning of the ninth century and that Shoshenk could not have been the biblical Shishak because he was the Biblical Pharaoh So referred to in the Scriptures during the closing days of Samaria, in the time of King Hezekiah.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.