Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GourmetDan
Either present data and facts to support your lame C14 claims about measuring *dates* or go educate yourself.

Here is another one for you: Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?

753 posted on 07/04/2006 3:46:06 PM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 748 | View Replies ]


To: Coyoteman
Here is another one for you: Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?

Even a child should be able to understand this by now.

755 posted on 07/04/2006 7:47:59 PM PDT by balrog666 (There is no freedom like knowledge, no slavery like ignorance. - Ali ibn Ali-Talib)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 753 | View Replies ]

To: Coyoteman

Lots of problems w/ that link.

If you follow the link you provided, you can see that the tree-rings don't line up very well at all. They are only marginally comparable. Then follow the link to the page that discusses the 'extension' process where pieces laying around, from peat bogs and old buildings are used and you get a much better idea of how unreliable tree-ring dating really is. There is at least as much variability and human interpretation in tree-ring dating as in anything else.

Finally, how was C14 dating modified based on tree-ring chronologies? Any at all?


761 posted on 07/05/2006 8:08:08 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 753 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson