Darwinist
Out of context: Reply #187
- Started
- Last post
- 592 Responses
- ********0
actually, discipler's got a point there, Radio-Carbon Dating is inconsistent.
Finally, although radiocarbon dating is the most common and widely used chronometric technique in archaeology today, it is not infallible. In general, single dates should not be trusted. Whenever possible multiple samples should be collected and dated from associated strata. The trend of the samples will provide a ball park estimate of the actual date of deposition. The trade-off between radiocarbon dating and other techniques, like dendrochronology, is that we exchange precision for a wider geographical and temporal range. That is the true benefit of radiocarbon dating, that it can be employed anywhere in the world, and does have a 50,000 year range. Using radiocarbon dating, archaeologists during the past 30 years have been able to obtain a much needed global perspective on the timing of major prehistoric events such as the development of agriculture in various parts of the world.