Re: Radiocarbon Dating Accuracy

From: wallyshoes <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
Date: Sun Jan 25 2004 - 14:47:16 EST

"D. F. Siemens, Jr." wrote:

> On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:11:00 -0700 "Rich Blinne" <e-lists@blinne.org>
> writes:
> > I wonder what the YECs will do with today's Science magazine (Vol.
> > 303
> > pp. 178-9, 202-7). In it is a description of extending the
> > calibration
> > curves for C14 dating from 26,000 calendar years B.P. to 50,000
> > calendar
> > years B.P. by 2006. This shows yet again what has already been
> > discussed
> > on this list. Namely, C14 dating is reliable. I am not holding my
> > breath that I will see this in the YEC literature, though.
> >
> >
> Rich,
> They'll do something like what they did earlier when the bristlecone
> pines were used to calibrate the C14 dates. They stated that there were
> often more than one growth ring produced in a year.

Lest we loose track of who promotes these ideas. Please note the website:

http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-252.htm

At a company where I used to work, it was the ubiquitous "they" who did
everything. Eventually, people were forced to cite references. Let us on
ASA not forget that the "they" (for "YEC") that is meant is usually the ICR
or AIG. Give credit where credit is due!

Walt

===================================
Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>

In any consistent theory, there must
exist true but not provable statements.
(Godel's Theorem)

You can only find the truth with logic
If you have already found the truth
without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
===================================
Received on Sun Jan 25 14:47:43 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jan 25 2004 - 14:47:44 EST