Errors in carbon 14 dating

I have read studies, papers and more, showing that Carbon-Dating can have an error rate of 200% Here are just a few extracts from science journal that got my attention.

"The lower leg lower leg of the Fairbanks Creek mammoth had a radiocarbon age of 15,380 RCY, while its skin and flesh were 21,300 RCY." (Natural History 1949) 'Living mollusk shell were carbon dated as being 2,300 years old.' (Science 1963) 'A freshly killed seal was carbon dated as having died 1,300 years ago' (Antarctic Journal 1971) "One part of Dima (a baby frozen mammoth) was 40,000, another part was 26,000 and the 'wood immediately around the carcass' was 9-10,000." (Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 1975) 'Shells from living snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old.' (Science 1984) "The two Colorado Creek, AK mammoths had radiocarbon ages of 22,850 ±670 and 16,150 ±230 years respectively." (Quaternary Research 1992) "One part of the Vollosovitch mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years old and another part at 44,000." (Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 1975) And one of my favorite extracts.

a reply to: Operation Black Rose I also have to think lab techniques have become better since the 1960's and 70's because of issues like this.

The science on radiocarbon dating is good, execution is the weak link.

Other dating methods are much more reliable to detect ages much older. Try to give us some sources that are a little less than 30 years old.

originally posted by: inert a reply to: Operation Black Rose I also have to think lab techniques have become better since the 1960's and 70's because of issues like this.I don't know if I really trust anything carbon dated or any of that crap to be honest."No matter how 'useful' it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results.There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates.

originally posted by: Operation Black Rose (Natural History 1949) (Science 1963) (Antarctic Journal 1971) (Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 1975) (Science 1984) (Quaternary Research 1992) (Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 1975) (Anthropological Journal of Canada 1981) a reply to: Operation Black Rose Well besides the fact that literally EVERY one of your sources are all old papers, published over 30 years ago, carbon-14 dating isn't even the only radiometric dating method being used.

Radiometric Dating - Modern Dating Methods Also, carbon-14 dating only goes out to about 60,000 years.

terrem43.ru

17 Comments

  1. Pingback:

  2. eric   •  

    Not to mention, the “In Development” area of the launcher in “Region/Account” will contain the word alpha if access is granted.

  3. eric   •  

    Wednesday night, Reba Mc Entire will step in as the guest judge.

  4. eric   •  

    People did not relinquish love, and love even enabled some of them to survive the horror and death around them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>