To: Coyoteman; Nathan Zachary
First, you simply can't date live clams and get a reliable age. Oceanic shellfish apparently recycle old carbon that hasn't been near the atmosphere in forever. Thus, the carbon indeed tends to be "old."
316 posted on
09/29/2005 4:23:44 PM PDT by
VadeRetro
(Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
To: VadeRetro
First, you simply can't date live clams and get a reliable age. =======
Oceanic shellfish apparently recycle old carbon that hasn't been near the atmosphere in forever. Thus, the carbon indeed tends to be "old."
That is correct. See the Marine Reservoir Correction Database.
Shellfish can be readily calibrated by dating pre-bomb specimens and establishing a calibration curve.
However, the problem with live organisms still exists and renders recent samples unreliable. Even with the Marine Database I would not trust samples more recent than World War II.
326 posted on
09/29/2005 4:44:01 PM PDT by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: VadeRetro; Coyoteman; Nathan Zachary
Oceanic shellfish apparently recycle old carbon that hasn't been near the atmosphere in forever. I think that particular Creationist "problems with Darwinism" claim references freshwater shellfish living in limestone rock pools.
336 posted on
09/29/2005 5:03:19 PM PDT by
Oztrich Boy
(Paging Nehemiah Scudder:the Crazy Years are peaking. America is ready for you.)
To: VadeRetro; Coyoteman
depending on what we mean by "live clams" you'd better get a reliable age before you try to date one.
360 posted on
09/29/2005 6:13:21 PM PDT by
King Prout
(19sep05 - I want at least 2 Saiga-12 shotguns. If you have leads, let me know)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson