Google Answers Logo
View Question
 
Q: Radiocarbon dating innacuracies ( No Answer,   3 Comments )
Question  
Subject: Radiocarbon dating innacuracies
Category: Science > Earth Sciences
Asked by: rafikki-ga
List Price: $8.00
Posted: 10 Jan 2005 11:17 PST
Expires: 09 Feb 2005 11:17 PST
Question ID: 455091
I recently heard about a study that was done wherein organic material
was buried for a few weeks or months, and when it was retrieved and
tested by radiometric methods, was dated hundreds of thousands of
years old. This was just hearsay, so the details may be inaccurate,
and I am uncertain if this was done recently or not, but I'm leaning
toward recently. At any rate, I need a link to the article, or to know
where I can locate it (if it exists), and it would also be helpful to
know if it was peer-reviewed and anything else that might help me
determine how factual it is, though that is not a requirement for this
question.
Answer  
There is no answer at this time.

Comments  
Subject: Re: Radiocarbon dating innacuracies
From: kriswrite-ga on 10 Jan 2005 13:07 PST
 
There are lots of scientists who debate the accuracy of radiometric
dating methods (most of their arguments may be found on Creationist
websites and books); however, I was unable to find the specific
article you were seeking. If you'd like more general information, just
let me know.

Kriswrite
Subject: Re: Radiocarbon dating innacuracies
From: johnintampa-ga on 10 Jan 2005 13:26 PST
 
Radiocarbon dating is only used to date things less than 50,000 years
old. Therefore the date could not have been reported to be "hundreds
of thousands of years old". Also, nothing is perfect, and if someone
made a mistake and contaminated the test in some way, it does not
invalidate the entire concept of radiocarbon dating.
Subject: Re: Radiocarbon dating innacuracies
From: mczagros-ga on 11 Jan 2005 20:29 PST
 
This is a standard fable of the anti-evolutionists screed. Like
everything else they put out, it is erroneous.

http://www.c14dating.com/corr.html gives a number of reasons why a
particular organic material may date incorrectly:

Contamination by limestone of certain freshwater shellfish: the
limestone has no radioactive C and and will bias attempts to determine
the date of the shell.

Oceanic differential: The C14 ratio in the ocean lags the atmosphere
by about 400 years due to slow diffusion of atmospheric C into the
water.

Pollution: dumping large quantities of coal pollution into the
atmosphere as a result of the industrial revolution has upset the
usual balance.

The Bomb: Increase radioactivity since Hiroshima has upset the usual balance.

More here:
http://archaeology.about.com/cs/datingtechniques/a/timing_3.htm

and here:
http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_results.php

Important Disclaimer: Answers and comments provided on Google Answers are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Google does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. Please read carefully the Google Answers Terms of Service.

If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you.
Search Google Answers for
Google Answers  


Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy