"Relative Dating" or "Absolute Dating" or "Chronometric Dating"

[Tristen]

On 10/20/2023 at 6:37 AM, farouk said:

Hi @Tristen Over the years there have been a lot of really bold statements from ppl who say things about the age of things based on carbon dating, but which really seem to be a lot more subjective than the way they are sometimes presented.

Hey @farouk,

"Carbon dating" is the 'runt of the litter' radiometric dating method. It has some benefits, and more drawbacks, when compared to other methods.

Due to the ratio of carbon isotopes being in a constant state of flux, and locally varied, there is far more uncertainty in the original isotope ratio assumption for this method.

But in favor of "carbon dating": for things of relatively young ages (a few thousand years old), we can sometimes find a local artifact of actual "known-age" that we can use as a true standard against which we can calibrate the "carbon dating" results.

Such properly independent standards are not available for older samples, or to other methods at all.

 

[kwikphilly]

On 12/11/2022 at 9:04 AM, Guest said:

I hate any "research" that requires animal testing bordering on or crossing over to animal abuse. Dr. Fauci's experiments are inexcusable as are any other "experiments" like this. I'm sure Dr. Mengele had "good" reasons for his experiments too!

Staying on topic, there are maps showing Antarctica connected to South America in the not too distant past. It's undeniable that the Earth's oceans have changed. The shoreline on Oak Island in Newfoundland has changed in the last 300-400 years or so.

As do I ,my response was to a poster suggesting someone hiding the fact that animals are being abused in their research thst they may receive funding- which I questioned because I think hiding the fact they are using and abusing animals is as deplorable

So I was not questioning what Fauci does or about his inexusable actions but wanted to know what the poster was referencing

[farouk]

On 10/28/2023 at 9:21 PM, Tristen said:

Hey @farouk,

"Carbon dating" is the 'runt of the litter' radiometric dating method. It has some benefits, and more drawbacks, when compared to other methods.

Due to the ratio of carbon isotopes being in a constant state of flux, and locally varied, there is far more uncertainty in the original isotope ratio assumption for this method.

But in favor of "carbon dating": for things of relatively young ages (a few thousand years old), we can sometimes find a local artifact of actual "known-age" that we can use as a true standard against which we can calibrate the "carbon dating" results.

Such properly independent standards are not available for older samples, or to other methods at all.

 

@Tristen I guess I've read about the drawbacks.............