Actually, this is not true. Tree ring data is used to calibrate C14 dating. Period. Full stop. Tree rings are calibrated simply by counting backwards.
I don't think so.
Are tree-ring chronologies reliable?
quote:
Because the ratio of 14C to 12C in the atmosphere varies over time, raw radiocarbon "dates" are calibrated to obtain actual calendar dates using dendrochronology. This process of calibration is an essential part of the radiocarbon dating method, and eliminates assumptions about historical atmospheric radiocarbon concentrations and the constancy of the decay rate of radiocarbon over time. (See How does the radiocarbon dating method work?) Dendrochronology thus provides an essential service to radiocarbon dating, the major method used to date archaeological remains, guaranteeing its accuracy throughout the period of interest to biblical chronology.
Hardly independent methods.
Funny thing is, when the C14 measurement is taken for tree ring corresponding to 10,000 years ago, and the C14 measurement for the 10,000th varve in Lake Suigetsu is taken, and when the C14 measurement for the 10,000th layer in the sediment of the Carico basin is taken, they are all the same. Just as if the 10,000th tree ring, the 10,000th varve, and the 10,000th marine sediment (and the 10,000th layer in certain stalactites found in Bahaman caves, did I mention those?) all formed at the same time.
Every single time? That is impressive. If it were only true.
Now you've ignored this important point when I've brought them up before tonight, but I am curious as to why the amazing coincidence here, how tree rings, varves, and marine sediments (and layers in stalactites) all formed at exactly the same rate so as to give consistent C14 dates?
Did I say I had a problem with the earth being 10000 years old? However, I do believe it is closer to 6000 years.
™ Version 4.2
