“The troubles of radiocarbon dating are undeniably deep and serious. Despite 35 years of technological refinement and better understanding, the underlying assumptions have been strongly challenged and warnings are out that radiocarbon dating may soon find itself in a crisis situation. Continuing use of the method depends on a “fix-it-as-we-go” approach, allowing for contamination here, fractionation there, and calibration whenever possible. It should be no surprise, then, that fully half the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half have come to be accepted.
“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. This whole blessed thing is nothing but 13th-century alchemy*, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read.
Robert E. Lee "Radiocarbon: ages in error" Anthropological Journal of Canada
2007-08-03
14:23:28
·
15 answers
·
asked by
theo48
1
in
Religion & Spirituality