Also, I've been told that Rasmussen et al. are contesting Carmi's findings and have submitted a response to Radiocarbon.
The "et al." includes J. Strugnell and F.M. Cross. Radiocarbon can be read on-line at www.radiocarbon.org, so anyone interested in matters radiocarbon have access. The response hasn't appeared yet, it seems. And, incidentally, I don't know the first thing about radiocarbon dating myself, so I'm neither endorsing nor countering any of the views held, I'm just passing on information. kol tuv Søren Holst, Copenhagen > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: Stephen Goranson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 18. december 2003 13:53 > Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Emne: [Megillot] Radiocarbon article > > > A significant article that has been little-noted in online Qumran > discussion: > > Israel Carmi, "Are the 14C Dates of the Dead Sea Scrolls Affected by > Castor > Oil Contamination?" Radiocarbon 44 (2002) 213-216. > Carmi presents a four-point critique of K.L. Rasmussen et al., "The > Effects of > Possible Contamination on the Radiocarbon Dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls > 1: > Castor Oil," Radiocarbon 43 (2001) 127-32. > > Prof. Carmi's Conclusions: > "1. The extant corpus of dates of the Dead Sea Scrolls is robust and does > not > indicate a problem with castor oil contamination. > 2. The experiment of Rassmussen et al. (2001) has no relevance to the > extant > dates of the Dead Sea Scrolls." > > best, > Stephen Goranson > Durham NC > > _______________________________________________ > g-Megillot mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot _______________________________________________ g-Megillot mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
