Radiocarbon dating is only accurate for objects

Mapping that counting error through the wiggle introduces bizarre changes to the bell-shaped curve - a problem known to specialists as "calibration stochastic distortion" (CSD). I actually wrote a paper discussing this for "Radiocarbon" (the scientific journal) with Mc Fadgen and Knox, gosh, nearly twenty years ago.

Even for a simple plateau, where the curve doesn't actually reverse slope, the CSD effect is easily shown to be that a single radiocarbon date has a bimodal distribution of 'true' years B. In fact, if you want a reference to "A calibration curve must sometimes be combined with contextual analysis, because there is not always a direct relationship between age and carbon-14 content", you could do worse than look through back issues of "Radiocarbon".

I suggest it might be a good idea to group all these here too.

Axel Berger , 6 February 2007 (UTC) A sample covered by Noah's flood for a year or so would totally contaminate the sample.

Desoto10 (talk) , 25 February 2011 (UTC) Where did that paragraph go? It is generally true that for any given sample eventually "the radiocarbon method will become less effective" if for no other reason than the usual 30,000 - 60,000 year fuzzy boundary of the technique's precision. For industrial revolution samples, we can worry about that in 30,000 years time.

The article concludes that, as common sense would dictate, a refined calibration curve for a particular assay improves the assay accuracy.

Secondly, try substituting phrases like "apple sauce" and "chicken salad" in for "carbon dating"; note how many hits you get.

Thirdly, since when was Google a substitute for peer-reviewed science?

I do not understand why the information regarding the fact that there are groups that dispute the accuracy of carbon dating continues to be removed from this article. Many thanks, --Rebroad , 5 February 2007 (UTC) Removed: Carbon dating is extremely controversial amongst fundamental religious believers such as creationists.

It can be used to prove the existence of items older than the supposed age of the Earth.

Search for radiocarbon dating is only accurate for objects:

radiocarbon dating is only accurate for objects-52

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

One thought on “radiocarbon dating is only accurate for objects”

  1. People talk about the same very limited group of things, they all express similar hobbies with slight variations, they all want to be unique but are much less so than they think, they all try for the same types of pictures (or just don’t put in any effort). How interesting, you have an artistic side hobby you don’t really have time for. OMG, you ALSO like that TV show that’s insanely popular right now?