Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Introduction
It is now quite generally accepted that conventional radiocarbon dates
need to be calibrated because of temporal variations in the radiocarbon
content of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
The discovery of this phenomenon was made largely by the pioneering work of de
Vries (1958; 1959) and Willis, Tauber, and Munnich (1960), and subsequently has been
carried on by more than a dozen radiocarbon laboratories worldwide (for a review see
Damon, Lerman, and Long, 1978).
The assessment of these variations relies on the measurement of C activity in samples
of known age.
Dendrochronologically dated wood has proved to be an ideal material for such
measurements, and currently all radiocarbon calibrations are based on measurements
of 14C activity in wood.
The longest chronology extant is that of the bristlecone pine, resulting
from the efforts of Schulman (1956) and Ferguson (1969; 1970; 1972).
It reaches continuously to 8681 years ago, and to 8580 years ago with sufficient
material to allow radiocarbon dating. This work includes measurements on wood as
old as 8000 years.
The discussions between the two disciplines must have had a few interesting moments
because Radiocarbon Dating [much to their surprise] conceded that there is significant
evidence of systematic differences between the laboratories.
Much to our surprise and despite previous findings to the contrary (Damon,
Lerman, and Long, 1978; Clark, 1975; Damon, 1970),there is significant evidence
of systematic differences between the laboratories represented.
The composite workshop data set is plotted against the 6th order polynominal
regressed on the logarithmically scaled data.
Calendric age minus conventional radiocarbon age is the ordinate; the calendric age is
the abscissa.
Positive values represent radiocarbon ages that are too young (too recent) and,
consequently, atmospheric concentrations were greater than that of the standard
atmosphere of 1890
Calibration of radiocarbon dates J. Klein et al. Radiocarbon, 24, 1982
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/download/748/753
?origin=publication_detail
However, an analysis of the workshop data set reveals that Radiocarbon Dating of the
Bristlecone Pine chronology is far from a perfect fit and that the rounded consensus
calibration curve is derived from a very jagged, saw tooth dataset.
Overall, the Radiocarbon Dating of the first 500 years of the chronology generates a
gianthorseshoe pattern which is totally inexplicable according to Radiocarbon Dating
theory.
Furthermore, the only way the numerous [vertical] straight line dating sequences [red
lines in the above diagram] can be generated is by Radiocarbon Dating [inconsistently]
assigning different years to the same tree-ring year from the chronology samples.
These problems would appear to be fatal for Radiocarbon Dating and it is extremely
remarkable that a consensus was reached by Dendrochronology.
However, in the process of dating the Bristlecone Pine tree-ring
chronology Radiocarbon Dating acquired a detailed knowledge of the tree-ring
chronology that was equally fatal for Dendrochronology.
The present master chronology consists of two existent chronology units and 17
individual specimens.
The first chronology unit is made up of paired cores from nine trees in
Methuselah Walk. These specimens comprise the second half (those with the most
missing rings, and generally higher mean sensitivity and lower serial correlation) of
the data in Table 1 (Ferguson 1968, Table 1).
The second unit is the Schulman Master, composed of 14 trees, which extends
from A.D. 800 to 1954. It incorporates specimens from four sites in the White
Mountains
A 7104 Year Annual Tree Ring Chronology for Bristlecone Pine, Pinus Aristata, from
the White Mountains, California C. W. Ferguson Tree-Ring Bulletin, Volume 29
(1969)
https://arizona.openrepository.com/arizona/bitstream/10150/259957/1/trb-29-0304-003-029.pdf
Furthermore, Radiocarbon Dating could detect any tree-ring samples that had been
reversed in the chronology based upon the Carbon-14 dates or by simple pattern
matching in the chronology.
However, it is also possible that the consensus was achieved by deliberately reversing
samples because the other half of the jagged, saw tooth was represented by a tree-ring
sample where the carbon-14 decayed at three times the normal rate or [more likely]
there was a catastrophic event that temporarily inflated the level of atmospheric carbon14.
Related
A Carbon-14 Chronology
In "Catastrophism"