Carbon dating flaws water

Rated 3.81/5 based on 741 customer reviews

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.

Example: wood found in a grave of known age by historically reliable documents is the standard for that time for the C14 content.

This standard content of C14 can then be used for wood not associated with a historically documented date.

So henceforth, any human remains, animal parts or vegetation from the 20th century onwards would show up as being ‘older’, according to standard radiocarbon dating techniques, than stuff that actually preceded it by a century, or more, according to the calendar. Radiocarbon was still a peerlessly accurate way of dating everything else in the world !!! Which is when the next set of awkward data started to show up - in droves - that showed that radiocarbon dates were often between 500-700 years out, according to what was presumed to be the fixed historical date of the organic matter being tested.

This was particularly the case with Egyptian artifacts and the standard chronology assigned to ancient Egypt.

This is only because it is well calibrated with objects of known age.Libby made the following observations about the accuracy of the method:1) The atmosphere, biosphere and the hydrosphere (oceans) are the three reservoirs of radiocarbon on earth, with the seas by far and away containing the greatest concentration of radiocarbon.If the quantity of water in the hydrosphere had changed substantially over the last 40,000 years (to use Libby’s own chronology), and / or the amount or carbon diluted in the oceans had substantially changed over this time period then radiocarbon dating wouldn’t return an accurate result.(Park all these bits of info in the back of your brain as we go along, we’ll sum it all up neatly at the end.)2) If the quantity and / or intensity of cosmic rays (another way of describing the particles of energy released by the sun and other celestial bodies, that are constantly bombarding the earth and which are part of our ) had substantially changed of this same period of time, then again radiocarbon dating wouldn’t return an accurate result.Radiocarbon dating was the brainchild of one Willard F.Libby, who published his treatise on radiocarbon dating in 1952 - and clearly stated the limitations of radiocarbon Dating right up front, as honest scientists were once wont to do.

Leave a Reply