Radiocarbon dating mistakes

It is not correct to state or imply from this evidence that the radiocarbon dating technique is thus shown to be generally invalid.

The problem with freshwater clams arises because these organisms derive the carbon atoms which they use to build their shells from the water in their environment.

In actual practice, it is the amassed evidence of multiple radiocarbon dates, generally on different materials by different investigators using different measurement apparatus, which is applied to a given chronological question.

Stories of the sort above, which are obviously meant simply to discredit radiocarbon dating, are very far from the truth.

Thus, most of these data bases may only be used on a very general, broad scale.

One of the pitfalls of using irregularly spaced or irregularly documented radiocarbon data becomes evident from the map generated by Fort (this volume, Chapter 16): while the general east-west and south-north trends become evident, some areas appear as having undergone anomalously early transitions to farming.

If this water is in contact with significant quantities of limestone, it will contain many carbon atoms from dissolved limestone.

Since limestone contains very little, if any, radiocarbon, clam shells will contain less radiocarbon then would have been the case if they had gotten their carbon atoms from the air.It makes no sense at all if man appeared at the end of billions of years.We will deal with carbon dating first and then with the other dating methods.(Aardsma, 1994, page 2.)The original reference [Trautman and Willis, page 200.] in the second case (natural gas) immediately reveals that both Whitelaw and The Answers Book have, unfortunately, neglected several very important " The sensitivity of the equipment used to make the radiocarbon measurements on these natural gas samples was limited to 30,000 to 34,000 years---the equipment was unable to measure back further. In this example, old radiocarbon dates from living clams or snails are given as evidence which discredits the reliability of radiocarbon dating. Aardsma addressed this issue in a 1989 article: The shells of freshwater clams can, and often do, give anomalous radiocarbon results.However, the reason for this is understood and the problem is restricted to only a few special cases, of which freshwater clams are the best-known example.This Radiocarbon reference must originally have been translated from Russian and it is not unreasonable to suppose that there was some loss of descriptive clarity as a result.

Tags: , ,