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
