Oh, and I wouldn’t be holding dendroChronology up as the infallible dating method that solidifies radiocarbon dating methods
[When will you get it through your head that neither “Woodmorappe” (nor you) have a clue about radiocarbon dating?]
Woodmorappe doesn’t have a clue? LOL- ah you are a funy funy guy
From your ‘bible site: “We could discuss the details of pattern-matching technique or the probability of error, but there is another, more quantitative way, to determine if the long tree-ring chronologies are accurate or not. One can use the amount of radiocarbon in the individual tree rings.”
Hahahaha- yup- one can use the very same error prone dating methods to ‘cross check’ the error prone dendrology- it’s like using a broken calculator with a broken number 4 on it to check anopther calculator with a broken number 4 and trying to add 2+2. Yup- use a system that is based on ASSUMPTIONS to check a system that relies on ASSUMPTIONS- to verify it’s accuracy lol
“A great deal of subjective interpretation is required to judge between true and false rings and true and false pattern matches between different pieces of wood. For estimating the ages of trees that are still living, this doesn’t seem to be a significant problem, but when it comes to matching up wood from different trees, to create an extended overlapping chronology, the problems become a bit more difficult to overcome.” http://www.detectingdesign.com/carbon14.html
Two can play the links game all day long coyote-
Tree ring dating inacurate
http://creationwiki.org/Carbon_dating_gives_inaccurate_results
http://www.nazarene-friends.org/booklets/radiometricdating.htm
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp
If the Flood(TM) injected enough carbon into the atmosphere to invalidate radiocarbon dating beyond that point there would be evidence for that increase in a great many carbon sinks and CO2 reservoirs. The evidence for such an increase in carbon IS NOT THERE.
If you want to postulate that radiocarbon dating is inaccurate because of the flood you have to account for the existing record of carbon and CO2, not just in Dendrochronology, but in varves, which can be counted, several kilometres of ice cores, geologic reservoirs and corals.