It wasn't that there was a screw up..but if you take a look at the equation
for carbon dating..being off by something as tiny even as say.. .0000001 in
your measurements could have a significant effect(100 years..or so..) on the
date of an object..carbon dating works to give you a date within about
10,000 years..and that they tried it on the shroud of turin just strikes me
as retarted..
Mark
http://dugmartsch.tripod.com
And your mom would stick a fork right into daddy's shoulder, and dad
would throw the garbage all across the floor, as we would lay and learn
what each other's bodies were for. And your mom would drink until she
was no longer speaking, and dad would dream of all the different ways to
die, each one a little more than he could dare to try.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dustin Summers
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 10:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [MMouse]: Re: Digest modestmouse.v001.n588
wasnt there some problem or screw up when they first ran carbon dating tests
on the shroud(sp?) of turin???? i forget i heard or saw something about this
somewhere.
dustin
----------
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [MMouse]: Re: Digest modestmouse.v001.n588
>Date: Wed, Dec 1, 1999, 5:18 PM
>
>
> Not that I even want to indulge in this debate while I have essay coming
due
> left & right, but:
>
> The funny thing about carbon dating has always been its assumption: That
the
> forces of nature present now have always been the same. It is basing
itself
> on present conditions to explain the past, which isn't (hasn't?) been
exactly
> uniform throught out it's "4+ billion" to "2000 years" (depending on who
you
> ask, I guess!) of existence.
>
>
>> K well, unless you have the scientific prowess to completely disprove
carbon
>> dating, which is something rediculous like 97.9% correct then maybe you
have
>> yourself an arguement. However, considering the oldest Primate/human
they
>> have found to date has been dated past 40,000 years I think there might
be
>> some problems with your theory. Do me a favor, take a few Geology
Courses
>> and then tell me what ya think. Im not sayin youre wrong, well, yes I
am,
>> but regardless, seriously, don't you think the smartest people in the
world
>> would know a little bit more about the Halflife of Carbon molecules then
say
>> you or I? For Christs sake, we actually had to perform carbon dating in
my
>> Geology class, thus making it a bit more of a theory than a hypothesis.
>> Dont believe everything that you read.
>> Jonathan
>>
>
>
