Radiocarbon dating and the word of god queensland dating laws
Vsmith , 20 February 2007 (UTC) From WP: FRINGE: "Theories which have not received critical review from the scientific community should be excluded from articles about mainstream scientific subjects.If the purpose of the article is to explain a scientific subject and there are people who dispute this subject, unless there is a verifiable refutation from the scientific community the theory does not represent a significant minority opinion within science itself.
Longer term variations (such as the sunspot cycle) would affect carbon dating.And as shown in the article an experiment has been made.After the nuclear tests C14 was doubled in the northern hemisphere relative to the southern and the ratio equalized in about five years. Axel Berger , 1 February 2007 (UTC) I want some sort of mention of the error rate for a start.For this reason the accuracy of The references are mostly from the 1950s and 60s and are not readily available to those of us in the boonies. The comments that the isotopes behave different chemically is quite contrary to what little I know about isotopes. User: Jclerman has extensive experience and background in the field of radioactive dating, but currently may not have access to the old paper refs used to verify the use and interpretation as used in this section.
I don't see why you consider them 'wrong' simply because they are old but I can see many people are using the section as an excuse to insert things i didn't write like "This may not be true." amd skew to a POV that carbon dating is wholy inaccurate.