Radiocarbon dating problem
The lecturer talked at length about how inaccurate C14 Dating is (as 'corrected' by dendrochronology).The methodology is quite accurate, but dendrochronology supposedly shows that the C14 dates go off because of changes in the equilibrium over time, and that the older the dates the larger the error.
Robert Whitelaw has done a very good job illustrating this theory using about 30,000 dates published in Radio Carbon over the last 40 years.(They conveniently forget to mention that the tree ring chronology was arranged by C14 dating.The scientists who were trying to build the chronology found the tree rings so ambiguous that they could not decide which rings matched which (using the bristlecone pine).If you have any more questions about it don't hesitate to write.(2.) I just listened to a series of lectures on archaeology put out by John Hopkins Univ.by Helen Fryman Question: What about radiocarbon dating? Response: I asked several people who know about this field. (1.) C14 dating is very accurate for wood used up to about 4,000 years ago.
This is only because it is well calibrated with objects of known age.
Dates up to this point in history are well documented for C14 calibration.
For object over 4,000 years old the method becomes very unreliable for the following reason: Objects older then 4,000 years run into a problem in that there are few if any known artifacts to be used as the standard.
When set to false the visual pad is not loaded and there is no overhead added to the menu.
All required source code for the menu to function is included within this document.
Libby, the discoverer of the C14 dating method, was very disappointed with this problem.