The Cycle of Cosmic Catastrophes: Flood, Fire, and Famine
Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
Thank you Cogs, I'll give both of those links a good study. I have read the other things that you mention, and I essentially understand them. I feel like we're on the verge of a brand new perspective, and hopefully the C14 dating will be replaced by tests that are more reliable.
I've put everything on the back burner for a while just to stay up to speed with the Comet theory. There's a lot to read and mull over. And, as you say, the theory seems to have it's shortcomings. We shall see.
I've put everything on the back burner for a while just to stay up to speed with the Comet theory. There's a lot to read and mull over. And, as you say, the theory seems to have it's shortcomings. We shall see.
C14
I agree that the C14 dates don't appear to be very reliable. Every few years someone comes out with a new table. Actually, I'm thinking of that statement from Pirates of the Caribbean that "the Pirate's Code is really just a set of guidelines" and not to be taken verbatim.This will put a lot of doubt on those C14 “holy opinions”
The other technologies will have to be considered as equal.
Natural selection favors the paranoid
- Charlie Hatchett
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:58 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
Here's a cool illustration Jacques Cinq-Mars posted on his site:
http://www.anst.uu.se/maabl971/wiggles/C14decay.html
If there were an increase of 14C (or decrease in 12C) in the local atmosphere, which was uncounted for in a particular analysis, then the results would indicate an unrealistically young date.
http://www.anst.uu.se/maabl971/wiggles/C14decay.html
If there were an increase of 14C (or decrease in 12C) in the local atmosphere, which was uncounted for in a particular analysis, then the results would indicate an unrealistically young date.
Charlie Hatchett
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
-
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
- Location: USA
- Charlie Hatchett
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:58 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
Right.Forum Monk wrote:Or unrealistically old, depending on which isotope is out of proportion.
If more 14C or less 12C than expected is in the specimen when it died, then an unrealistically young result is obtained. Hence our ability to obtain finite 14C dating results on Permian and Carboniferous samples:
Conversely, if less 14C or more 12C than expected is in the sample when it died, then unrealistically old dates are obtained.
Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya -- 270 mya) is the only time period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period ).
The following paper describes many Precambrian samples that have provided finite results:
http://icr.org/pdf/research/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf
Charlie Hatchett
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
-
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16013
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
Ancient tree rings have allowed scientists to calibrate the carbon-14 clock back to 9400 B.C. The layered growth of coral reefs pushes the calibration back another 12,000 years, but runs into another problem. Deep ocean waters dilute the carbon-14 levels, making reefs seem older than they are.
Cores taken from Suigetsu's lake bottom avoid that problem. Counting the thin white layers of dead algae, each less than a millimeter thick, gave the researchers the year, which could then be compared to the date obtained by carbon dating, back to 43,000 B.C.
If you find a HSS or HE bone from 43,000 BC in Texas, I'd settle. Close enough for government work, as we always used to say!
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
- Charlie Hatchett
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:58 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
Minimalist wrote:Ancient tree rings have allowed scientists to calibrate the carbon-14 clock back to 9400 B.C. The layered growth of coral reefs pushes the calibration back another 12,000 years, but runs into another problem. Deep ocean waters dilute the carbon-14 levels, making reefs seem older than they are.
Cores taken from Suigetsu's lake bottom avoid that problem. Counting the thin white layers of dead algae, each less than a millimeter thick, gave the researchers the year, which could then be compared to the date obtained by carbon dating, back to 43,000 B.C.
If you find a HSS or HE bone from 43,000 BC in Texas, I'd settle. Close enough for government work, as we always used to say!
Right, I'm not about to split hairs!
However, with the new 14C error problems being uncovered, it seems U-Series and other methods (Ar/Ar, TL, etc...) are looking like better dating options.
Charlie Hatchett
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
-
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16013
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
Sure, it's important to remember that C14 is now 60 year old technology which is three lifetimes in science.
It still seems good enough for relatively recent dates (up to 10,000 BC), though.
It still seems good enough for relatively recent dates (up to 10,000 BC), though.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
-- George Carlin
-- George Carlin
- Charlie Hatchett
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:58 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
I don't know, Min. Al at Topper got ca. 8500 B.P. dates from the Clovis strata. I think that might be one of the reasons why he's somewhat behind this new impact theory.Minimalist wrote:Sure, it's important to remember that C14 is now 60 year old technology which is three lifetimes in science.
It still seems good enough for relatively recent dates (up to 10,000 BC), though.
I need to find the reference reporting those dates.
Charlie Hatchett
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
Boy, am I glad I stirred this pot.
It opens up all kinds of things to question.
Anyone what to take on humans hunting dinosaurs?
Or the dates of the Norse settlements in New Found land?
Or how old the Newport Tower is?
What about Cahokia and Poverty Point?
Maybe the “Stonehenge’s” of South America?
Or the canal system across Florida from ft Myers to Miami?
Or the human remains found in the tide lands around Houston, Tex.
Or…or….or…or…
It opens up all kinds of things to question.
Anyone what to take on humans hunting dinosaurs?
Or the dates of the Norse settlements in New Found land?
Or how old the Newport Tower is?
What about Cahokia and Poverty Point?
Maybe the “Stonehenge’s” of South America?
Or the canal system across Florida from ft Myers to Miami?
Or the human remains found in the tide lands around Houston, Tex.
Or…or….or…or…
- Charlie Hatchett
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:58 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
It's obvious we're gonna need to move on to more stable dating methods.
Charlie Hatchett
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
The 'Toba' bottleneck is derived from DNA studies - not carbon dating.Charlie Hatchett wrote:Good question. If an impact like the one we're discussing set the Northern Hemisphere on fire, would that increase 12C levels. If so, then any 14C/12C ratios would indicate a date greater than the "true" date. The smaller the ratio, the older the indicated date. Someone check my logic. This stuff is confusing.Minimalist wrote:So how come the geneticists claim the 'bottleneck' occured 60,000 years earlier because of the Toba eruption?
I wonder how Uranium-series dating compares to 14C dating in the 60K range?
However, the vast majority of the human population at the time of the supposed impact would have been living in the mid latitudes and tropics - Africa, Middle East, SE Asia etc so even if a local extinction occurred it wouldn't necessarily show up as a genetic bottleneck.
(Not that I believe anything quite so catastrophic occurred anyway )
- Charlie Hatchett
- Posts: 2274
- Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 10:58 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
Thanks for the clarification, Andy.The 'Toba' bottleneck is derived from DNA studies - not carbon dating.
BTW, did you develop this site: Ukweatherworld. I'm a weather enthusiast.
Charlie Hatchett
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
PreClovis Artifacts from Central Texas
www.preclovis.com
http://forum.preclovis.com
I co-own it I shall expect to see you posting there soon! We have a good mix of professionals, knowledgeable amateurs (or, in my case, semi-knowledgeable and people who just like snow and thunderstorms.Charlie Hatchett wrote:Thanks for the clarification, Andy.The 'Toba' bottleneck is derived from DNA studies - not carbon dating.
BTW, did you develop this site: Ukweatherworld. I'm a weather enthusiast.
btw not been on here for a while because of changes to computers and subsequent 'loss' of all my bookmarks - which I'm gradually recreating again.