Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
105 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), nwr (2 members, 103 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,155 Year: 6,267/6,534 Month: 460/650 Week: 230/278 Day: 26/44 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Amino Acid Dating
Posts: 33957
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1

Message 28 of 34 (580802)
09-11-2010 11:53 AM

A GREAT example of how science does work.
Actually, this whole thread is just another example of how reliable the Scientific Method is.

The important point is revision and testing.

Particularly when new methods are developed, new tools and procedures tried, it is not at all unusual for there to be errors.

Fortunately, science almost never relies on one methodology, one sample, one experiment or experimenter.

This really illustrates the Scientific method. Both the early Radio-carbon dating and AAR gave readings that conflicted with OTHER independent dating methods.

The Scientific Method issue then became "Why?"

It was a success of the SM, it showed that something was wrong. It could have been AAR or Radio-carbon dating or any of the other methods used.

So the methods were all tested, procedures revised; it is called learning.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022