Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
111 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (1 member, 110 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,087 Year: 6,199/6,534 Month: 392/650 Week: 162/278 Day: 2/28 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Great debate: radiocarbon dating, Mindspawn and Coyote/RAZD
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 42 of 119 (711769)
11-22-2013 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by mindspawn
11-20-2013 5:45 AM


Re: Some annual rainfall weather information for your consideration
My recent post Message 40 summarizes my arguments to date, and provides an outline for future posts covering these issues in greater detail.
Message 41 is the first of these posts, and it provides the basic methods of dendrochronology, especially those that sort out annual rings from false and missing rings.

In my post 27 I clearly agreed that Irish Oak, German Oak and some Bristlecone Pine trees show annual rings and are not in precipitation sensitive environments. So I fail to see why you keep emphasizing a point that we are in agreement about. ...

For the simple reasons that :

  1. the Irish oak dendrochronology is longer, goes further into the past, than the Bristlecone Pine,
  2. the German oak and pine dendrochronology is longer, goes further into the past, than the Bristlecone Pine,
  3. the extremely high consilience of these two dendrochronologies shows that the information has an extremely high degree of confidence (a better phrase than "truth" in scientific speak), and
  4. the very high consilience (99.5% agreement) of the Bristlecone Pine dendrochronology with these two chronologies gives us a very high degree of confidence that it is accurate and precise and actually does represent annual layers.

Curiously, if you now accept the Irish and German chronologies, then your original "main problem" Message 3 ...

My main problem with carbon dating is its calibration against tree ring chronology, which I feel is unreliable due to assumptions about the annual nature of rings. ...

... is fully answered. This correlation is the same (within 99.5%) for all three chronologies, and you can see it here:

http://www.ipp.phys.ethz.ch/...arbon/HajdasPhDthesis1993.pdf (9)

quote:

This curve can certainly be used to calibrate the raw 14C age calculation to account for variations in the 14C atmospheric concentrations that were in effect at each age and obtain dates closer to accurate calendar dates (generally younger than the raw 14C dates):

  • λ14C is 5730 years +/- 40 - Message 22
  • the raw 14C age formula is: t = {ln(Nf/No)/ln(1/2)}•λ14C
  • Where No is the original level of the C-14 isotope in the sample (when it was alive and growing and absorbing atmospheric C-14), and Nf is the amount remaining.

So now we can calculate what No was for each age:

Nf/No = (1/2)^(t/λ14C)

No = Nf•2^(t/5740)

Note that it is not the decay rate that is calibrated by the dendrochronology (that is determined in the lab), but the proportion of 14C/12C in the atmosphere at the time the sample grew (used atmospheric carbon).

... I asked you to show proof that specifically the living ancient White Mountain Bristlecone Pines also agree with the short term chronology (eg 1816). Could you kindly provide me with a link or post some evidence. This is my second request, my first request was in post 27.

That will be covered in the post on Bristlecone Pines, but until then you can consider that the consilience of the Bristlecone Pine chronology to the Irish Oak chronology and the German Oak and Pine chronology is "proof" (very high consilience shows very high confidence in the results) that it is accurate and precise, not just to 1816 but for the total length of the chronology, over 8,000 years.

Which, of course, is why I keep repeating the information on all three dendrochronologies.

Because to challenge Bristlecone Pine accuracy you then need to explain the consilience with the other two chronologies.

These chronologies also show that the earth is at least 12,000 years old as a minimum, and that there was no interruption in the tree growth by any catastrophic event during that period.

Meanwhile I await your response to Message 41

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : ..

Edited by RAZD, : .

Edited by RAZD, : link, coding fixes

Edited by RAZD, : note added


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by mindspawn, posted 11-20-2013 5:45 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by mindspawn, posted 11-26-2013 5:35 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 45 of 119 (711981)
11-25-2013 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by mindspawn
11-25-2013 5:18 AM


Re: Lake Suigetsu varves
Thanks mindspawn for reposting most of this.

Lake Suigetsu was separate from Lake Mikata before the canal was built that stopped the diaton growth in Lake Suigetsu a few hundred years ago.

This well known piece of information explains why the chronology is "floating" rather than an absolute chronology.

I appreciate your explanation regarding the deposition of the silt in the central lake locations, and believe you have largely explained the seasonal as opposed to rainfall deposition of the silt particles.

That's a start.

... This effect is complicated by the fact that there was a land bridge separating Lake Mikata from Lake Suigetsu in the past.

Which isolated Lake Suigetsu, thus ensuring all inflow was from the river and local runoff (watershed).

Curiously the fact that the diatoms settle fast in mass deaths and the clay sediment settles slowly fits in with my claim of 10-12 annual layers due to the fact that the rainfall season overlaps with the diatom bloom season. Freshwater diatom blooms have a varying life-span depending on location, but in many locations this lasts for a number of months in spring/summer. During the 5 to 6 months of heaviest rainfall the steady deposition would be interrupted by approximately 11 mass diatom die-offs due to the number of spring tides that overlap the rainy season.

Believing this does not make it so. It doesn't matter how many die-offs you imagine, because you don't have the time to form a clay layer between them. There could be two, there could be twenty and you would still have one diatom layer because there would be no separation.

Please provide rainfall records, both current and historical so you can compare them to actual core sediment layers.

Please provide information on when these spring tides occurred so you can compare them to actual core sediment layers.

Integration of Old and New Lake Suigetsu 14C Data Sets
RADIOCARBON, Vol 55, Nr 4, 2013, p 2049–2058
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/...icle/download/16339/pdf

quote:
Abstract

The varved sediment profile of Lake Suigetsu, central Japan, offers an ideal opportunity from which to derive a terrestrial record of atmospheric radiocarbon across the entire range of the 14C dating method. Previous work by Kitagawa and van der Plicht (1998a,b, 2000) provided such a data set; however, problems with the varve-based age scale of their SG93 sediment core precluded the use of this data set for 14C calibration purposes. Lake Suigetsu was re-cored in summer 2006, with the retrieval of overlapping sediment cores from 4 parallel boreholes enabling complete recovery of the sediment profile for the present “Suigetsu Varves 2006” project (Nakagawa et al. 2012). Over 550 14C determinations have been obtained from terrestrial plant macrofossils picked from the latter SG06 composite sediment core, which, coupled with the core’s independent varve chronology, provides the only non-reservoir-corrected 14C calibration data set across the 14C dating range.

... Like-wise, depth control in SG06 is at 1-mm precision (Nakagawa et al. 2012), as defined by digital photographs of the freshly exposed core section surface taken immediately after extraction from the lake (thereby minimizing subsequent color changes through oxidization and any ost-extraction/storage-related expansion/contraction of the sediment).

The span of missing sediment between successive SG93 core sections is obtained through subtracting the equivalent SG06 composite core depth of the bottom of a given SG93 core section from that of the top of the underlying section (Table 2). The age span of this gap is given in the varve count and 14C model-derived age scale of Bronk Ramsey et al. (2012; see also Staff et al. 2013; given in SG062012 yr).

The gaps between core sections are all <20 issue).


The new chronology has no gaps and is longer than the previous one, more accurate (1mm compared to 3mm) and the core diameter is larger. Previous core sections are now aligned to the new set and the plant macrofossils from the old cores are used in the new correlation curve.

There are some pictures (in color on the online PDF version) of the cores, which you may want to look at so you can see if there are any of the effects you claim.

1) How were the volcanic layers dated ? With Th-Ur dating (hehe)

Perhaps you could read the article and find out. Even if it weren't, you still need to deal with the demonstrated accuracy and precision of Uranium-Thorium dating.

2) The consilience with coral data is completely irrelevant, that was done with Th-Ur dating.

Which is why it is consilience. Saying it is irrelevant does NOT explain the high degree of consilience between two different systems, when there would be NO such correlation if either were based on erroneous measurements ... unless you have a means to explain why they both are wrong in the same way at the same time. Otherwise just claiming it is irrelevant is a sign of cognitive dissonance and your attempt to resolve it by ignoring information.

I'll get to Lake Suigetsu again in greater detail later. In the meantime I await your response to Message 41 and Message 42

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : c/d

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by mindspawn, posted 11-25-2013 5:18 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by mindspawn, posted 12-03-2013 7:29 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 46 of 119 (711983)
11-25-2013 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by mindspawn
11-25-2013 6:38 AM


Re: Ignorance and Misunderstanding - Uranium and Thorium
You say that I have provided ZERO evidence , and yet I have shown a link and discussed the method in which they have recently determined the half lives of thorium230 and uranium234:

And yet it is not any evidence of your claims. Evidence for your claims involves some demonstration of your mysterious magical 11-12 events for example, rather than just claims.

Here you make my whole point for me, the decay constant for Th230 and Ur 234 is based on the decay constant for U238. This ruins your case that Thorium dating is an independent measurement. You say "see above for reference to its derivation" and yet none of the above quotes even came close to having any reference to the derivation of the decay constant for U238 on which thorium/uranium decay relies.

AND compared them to previous determinations that were done in the lab -- as I documented. The new values have smaller errors but otherwise replicate the previous ones, and the consilience from using a different methodology to determine their values once again provides high confidence in their accuracy and precision.

Again, if you want to see the lab obtained independent values I suggest you do some reading. Starting here: Half-life of 230Th. It is on-line and tells how the half-life was measured independently in the lab.

I'll get to Uranium-Thorium dating again in greater detail later. In the meantime I await your response to Message 41 and Message 42

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : ..

Edited by RAZD, : .

Edited by RAZD, : ..


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by mindspawn, posted 11-25-2013 6:38 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 2:34 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 50 of 119 (712040)
11-26-2013 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by mindspawn
11-26-2013 3:16 AM


Re: Some annual rainfall weather information for your consideration
Just for the record, I don't believe in any vast conspiracy. We will be dealing with the consilience continually in our other discussions , I just felt it necessary to state my position on the alleged conspiracy for the record. I believe the "cherry picking" isn't true cherry picking because its unintentional.

In other words:

  1. all dendrochronologists are bumbling idiots too naive, ignorant and incompetent to notice something you only believe has happened, and

  2. still no evidence of your mysterious magic 11-12 extra layers every year.

Just making spurious claims is not an argument, denial of evidence is not an argument ...

... these are symptoms in keeping with cognitive dissonance theory

quote:
Belief disconfirmation paradigm

Dissonance is aroused when people are confronted with information that is inconsistent with their beliefs. If the dissonance is not reduced by changing one's belief, the dissonance can result in restoring consonance through misperception, rejection or refutation of the information, seeking support from others who share the beliefs, and attempting to persuade others.[7]


ie - your way of telling yourself that the evidence can safely be ignored rather than faced.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by mindspawn, posted 11-26-2013 3:16 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 51 of 119 (712043)
11-26-2013 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by mindspawn
11-26-2013 4:42 AM


Re: Dendrochronology Basics
Thanks for the educational post. It didn't cover our points of dispute though and so I quoted only the relevant sections. I feel you still have not faced the fact that the Bristlecone Pines are in a unique situation, lacking any gradual transitions between favorable and unfavorable conditions. The conditions are always unfavorable, that is why there is a growth ring for every significant precipitation event. Multiple rings have been proven in experiments.

And yet, curiously, the part you quoted tells you and shows you the difference between stress rings and end-of-year rings:

quote:
... The key to distinguishing between double or false rings and annual rings lies in the nature of the transition between the latewood and earlywood cells: in a false or double ring the transition is gradual due to the phasing in and out of favorable growing conditions (Fig. 3).

In an annual tree ring, the transition from one ring’s latewood to the next ring’s earlywood is abrupt because ring production actually stopped for some period of time, typically during winter. ...


Look at the rings just to the right of the false band and the ones just to the right of the winter band - are they remotely the same?

I am still waiting to for your explanation why there would not be a thin growth ring during a significant summer rainfall that occurs between two dry spells in the dry White Mountain region. I see no other possibility, and have already dealt with your "snow melt in spring" argument.

Because trees have reserves that they can use between rainfalls, but this doesn't happen in the winter because they are frozen.

Regarding your figure 1, I definitely agree that overlaps as shown in the diagram would make a strong case, provided those are proven annual layers and the annual layers remained annual throughout the chronology. ...

Which is definitely the case with the twos oak chronologies that somehow still match the Bristlecone pine chronology with only 0.5% error after 7600 years.

... My problem with crossdating is that the overlaps in reality may not be as clear as shown in the diagram. A sequence of four or five rings even if differing in dates would naturally overlap over time merely through statistical probability. We need a long matching sequence as shown in the diagram to eliminate the strong statistical probability of short sequences showing matching patterns.

Which is easily demonstrated with the Bristlecone pines -- living trees with ~5,000 years of rings matched with standing dead trees with ~7,000 years of rings ... unless you think they have stood for thousands of years, would have thousands of years of rings to match.

Also notice that the overlap shown in Fig 1 has consilient rings between all three pieces so the overlaps are normally much more than "four or five rings" -- again you must think the dendrochronologists are incompetent, naive and ignorant ... but that doesn't matter -- you are not explaining the consilience between the three chronologies with ad hoc nit-picking that IF TRUE would mean the matches between the chronologies could not logically have occurred.

This inability of any single species to successfully cross-date with Bristlecone Pines is not a strong argument for cross-dating Bristlecone Pines. ...

What inability???????????? Did you not understand? That is a symptom in keeping with cognitive dissonance theory

quote:
... the dissonance can result in restoring consonance through misperception, rejection or refutation of the information, ...

The Bristlecone pines have not only been cross-checked between their two species living in separate isolated communities, but with the Foxtail pine and with the Ponderosa pine chronology.

A premature conclusion considering that you have not yet shown how a tree in a truly dry area would not respond with growth to each significant summer rainfall between completely arid dry spells in soil that retains no moisture (White Mountains).

Except (a) I have shown the difference between a stress band and a winter band, and (b) the consilience with the other chronologies gives high confidence in the Bristlecone pine chronology.

More on this in the next post

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : ...

Edited by RAZD, : ..

Edited by RAZD, : cog/dis


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by mindspawn, posted 11-26-2013 4:42 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 4:09 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 52 of 119 (712046)
11-26-2013 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by mindspawn
11-26-2013 4:42 AM


Bristlecone Pines
A premature conclusion considering that you have not yet shown how a tree in a truly dry area would not respond with growth to each significant summer rainfall between completely arid dry spells in soil that retains no moisture (White Mountains).

Curiously, I have addressed this fantasy before. Let's look at the facts about Bristlecone pines in a little more detail (I've updated this for the latest information on climate so this basically summarizes my argument on Bristlecone pines):

Bristlecone Pines

As we saw in Message 41, Dendrochronology Basics, the oldest known non-clonal trees are all Bristlecone Pines:

  • the "Methuselah" tree, with an estimated germination date of 2832 BCE (wiki)
  • the "Prometheus" tree (aka WPN-114), with a measured age of 4862 when cut down in 1964 for research, however this is a minimum age due to the core of the tree is missing, giving it a minimum germination date of 2898 BCE (but likely older). (wiki)
  • the "Schulman" tree (my name for the tree because Schulman took the core and he was a pioneer in dendrochronology in the area), with an estimated germination date of 3051 BCE (wiki)
  • the "Ancient Sentinels" - standing dead trees, as old as 7,000 years, no information on their germination dates at this point (article)

At this point we don't know from the information available when the ~7,000 year old dead trees died -- it could have been last year, 10 years ago, maybe 100 years ago, or more. What we do know is that the methodology of dendrochronology can be used to combine it, and other old wood (some dead wood is lying on the ground in these same areas), and specimens from other sites into a complete chronology spanning thousands of years. We also know that such a chronology has been made, and it was updated in 1985:

Dendrochronology of Bristlecone Pine(1)

quote:
Field work led to the collection of 130 ·specimens. About 76% of these were small cross-sections taken in hopes of chronology extension. One series collected in 1981 that is about 500 years in length is over 10,000 radiocarbon years old (H. N. Michael, personal communication, 1982). It is one of three different series that date in the 2000 or so calendar years that lie just beyond the continuous chronology that reaches 6700 B.C. The remaining 24% of the collections were used to strengthen various intervals of the master chronology where specimen numbers were limited.

There has been no extension to the chronology beyond 6700 B.C. However, the collection and dating of many new specimens in the past nearly four years has not provided even a single-year change. Contrary-wise, each newly dated specimen has served to verify and strengthen the master chronology.


The dendrochronology extends back to 6,700 BCE, but there are older samples floating off the end of the continuous absolute chronology.

The Bristlecone Pine chronology does not rely on just one species, but uses two closely related species for a cross-reference:

The primary source is the Great Basin Bristlecone Pine: Pinus longaeva(2)

quote:
Great Basin bristlecone pine occurs in a relatively narrow latitudinal range in California, Nevada, and Utah [86,94]. In California it occurs on the summits of the Panamint, Inyo, and White mountains of Mono and Inyo counties [53]. In Nevada it has scattered occurrences on high mountain ranges from the White Mountains in Esmeralda County; north to the southern Ruby Mountains of south-central Elko County; south to the Spring Mountains of west-central Clark County; and east to the Ruby Mountains and Snake Range of White Pine County [31,63,94]. In western Utah Great Basin bristlecone pine occurs on the western edge of the Colorado Plateau from the Confusion Range of Millard County; north to the Uinta Mountains of Summit, Wasatch, and Duchesne counties; south to the Pine Valley Mountains of Washington County and northern Kane County; and east to the Wasatch Plateau of Emery County [94,136]. The U.S. Geological Survey provides a distributional map of Great Basin bristlecone and Rocky Mountain pines.

Great Basin bristlecone pine Pinaceae Pinus longaeva ID Fact Sheet(3)

quote:
Leaf: Evergreen needles, short (1 to 1 1/2 inches long), curved, fascicles of 5, dark green but usually covered with white dots of dried resin. Remain on tree for 10-17 years, giving a bushy appearance that resembles a fox's tail.

All the oldest Bristlecone pines are Great Basin bristlecone pines, Pinus longaeva.

The secondary source is the Rocky Mountain Bristlecone Pine: Pinus aristata(4)

quote:
Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine, Great Basin bristlecone pine (P. longaeva), and foxtail pine (P. balfouriana) share a common ancestor [117,152]. Taxa within the bristlecone-foxtail pine complex (Pinus, subgenus Strobus, section Parrya Mayr, subsection Balfourianae Englm.) are distinguished by growth form, bark, and differences in chemical composition [8,32,93,100]. Bristlecone and foxtail pines readily produce fertile hybrids in the laboratory [131,152]. Disjunct distributions, and possibly other factors, prevent natural hybridization among the 3 species.

The ranges of Great Basin and Rocky Mountain bristlecone pines do not overlap. The Colorado-Green River drainage has separated the 2 bristlecone pine species for millennia, and there is a 160-mile (260-km) gap between the 2 bristlecone species at their closest point in Utah and Colorado [57,101].The U.S. Geological Survey provides distributional maps of Rocky Mountain bristlecone and Great Basin bristlecone pines.

Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine occurs in upper montane and subalpine communities [146]. Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) and limber pine (Pinus flexilis) associate with Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine throughout most of Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine's range. Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine tends to exclude Engelmann spruce and limber pine on upper subalpine and timberline sites. Even in lower subalpine sites, Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine is more common in mesic areas than limber pine [104]. Brunstein [22] noted limber pine was absent from Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine communities on the east slope of the Park Range of Colorado. Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) may co-occur throughout Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine's range on seral sites including burns. Rocky Mountain lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) also occurs on new burns and other disturbed sites in Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine communities [70,104].

The ranges of Great Basin bristlecone, Rocky Mountain bristlecone, and foxtail pines do not overlap. The Colorado-Green River drainage has separated the 2 bristlecone pine species for millennia.


Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine Pinaceae Pinus aristata ID Fact Sheet(5)

quote:
Leaf: Evergreen needles, short (1 to 1 1/2 inches long), curved, fascicles of 5, dark green but usually covered with white dots of dried resin. Remain on tree for 10-17 years, giving a bushy appearance that resembles a fox's tail.

The climate and ecology of the Bristlecone pine is high, dry and cool, with minimal precipitation, most occuring as snow, which occurs even in July. The trees have adapted to the environment by taking advantage of the resources available.

Substrate-oriented distribution of Bristlecone pine in the White Mountains of California(6)

quote:
Superficial inspection of the White Mt. stands of bristlecone pine reveals that their development is greatly affected by geological substrate (Fig. 2). Of the several rock types exposed in the subalpine elevational belt, only one, a dolomitic limestone, supports well-­developed forests of bristlecone pine. The other substrates, principally a quartz1tic sandstone and a granite, have, by comparison, poorly developed forests, and are often vegetated by a high-altitude sage­ brush community.

The White Mountains are a small but high desert range parallel to and east of the Sierra Nevada, and separated from them by the north end of the Owens Valley ... This area includes mainly elevations from 9,500 to 11,500 ft, where all slope directions and varied geologic substrates are represented.

Three groups of geologic substrates are extensively exposed in the study area. Firstly, there are sandstones ... our study was restricted to those of the Campito Formation which are primarily quartzitic. Secondly, there are granitic rocks ... generally medium gray in color. The third substrate type is a dolomite belonging to the Precambrian Reed Dolomite formation (Nelson, 1962). This dolomite is massive, medium-grained, and light gray to white.

... The degree of surface rock cover was estimated at 20 widely separated sites on each of the three substrates, and the following semi-quantitative averages obtained: dolomite, 77%; sandstone, 84%; granite, 27%.

... All samples were collected at 11,000 ft elevation, and the figures presented are averages of analyses of soils from both north and south slopes; there is no appreciable difference between soils from north slopes and those from south slopes. Mechanical analysis of the soils was by the hydrometer method (Bouyoucos, 1936) and soil moisture tension values were determined by the method of Richards (1949). Available moisture was calculated from the difference between the values at 1/3 atm and 15 atm tension. Cation exchange capacity was determined using modifications of methods of Mehlich (1948) and Bower et al. (1952).

... The three geologic substrates differ in reflectance characteristics. Dolomite, being light gray or white, reflects a greater percentage of incoming solar radiation than do the dark sandstone and granite. A high proportion of the soil surface is covered by rock fragments, and this tends to impart the reflective characteristics of the parent rock to the soil. ... Average weekly maxima ‘were 2 to 5 C, and average weekly minima 1.5 to 3.0 C, higher on sandstone. The temperature differences persisted at considerable depths.
This difference in soil temperature between substrates is paralleled by a soil moisture difference. Soil moisture content was determined weekly by gravimetric methods at the same two adjacent stations during late summer of 1962. During this period little rain fell. The course of soil moisture at a 20 cm depth in the two soils is plotted in Figure 4. The data show that the dolomite soil remained consistently wetter than the sandstone soil, even though the two sampling sites were under the same climatic regime. ...

... To determine the effects of reduced soil moisture on the metabolism of bristlecone pine plants, measurements of the rates of photosynthesis and respiration were made in the laboratory as the soil dried out.

Three plants about 15 cm high and 20 to 40 years old were dug from the field in the summer of 1961, established in plastic pots of dolomite soil, ... September of 1962. By this time, new roots had penetrated the soil mass to the sides and bottoms of the pots. Repeated measurements of apparent photosynthesis and respiration were made on these plants in late fall of 1962 as the soil dried.

... Results of these measurements are shown in Figure 7. Photosynthesis was severely depressed at a soil moisture level between 8 and 6%. Since respiration continued without such severe depression, production of photosynthate was curtailed more severely than its consumption. By referring back to Figure 4 it can be seen that at the field site where soil moisture was measured, moisture levels on dolon1ite were below the wilting coefficient on only two dates, ... It seems then that small site differences in soil moisture could cause large differences in productivity in bristlecone pine, and that such small moisture differences do exist between dolomite and sandstone soils in the field.

... Table 2 shows mean climatic values for a ten-year period (1953-1962) at White Mt. 1 (Crooked Creek Laboratory), a cooperative US Weather Bureau station at 10,150 f t in the bristlecone pine zone (Pace, 1963). Annual precipitation has averaged only 12.54 inches for this period of record. Monthly snowfall and rainfall figures reveal the sharp segregation of precipitation in to winter snow and summer snow and rain. Winter snow comprises the bulk of the precipitation total. ...

Mean monthly temperatures are above 50 F only in July and August, showing the effect of high altitude in restricting summer warming. Winter temperatures are not excessively cold; the record low is -21 F. ...

... the open nature of the bristlecone pine “forest,” actually a woodland by many standards.

TABLE 2.-Climatic summary for Crooked Creek Laboratory, 1953-1962 (Pace, 1963)
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDecTotals(*)
Ave Snowfallin14.521.512.614.816.82.80.70.01.66.69.611.4103.5
Ave Snow H2Oin1.362.001.091.211.480.220.070.00.150.530.930.9810.02
Ave Rainfallin0.00.00.00.00.130.01.350.630.350.060.00.02.52
Ave H2O precip.in1.362.001.091.211.600.221.420.630.500.600.930.9812.54

... Climate is that of a desert mountain range, very dry for forest vegetation, but also cool.


(*) - Note that I added a column for annual totals.

Note the only month without snow is August, and the highest rainfall is in July. July would also be when the snow melts, so it would be the wettest month of the year for growing, and August would be the driest.

By combining actual measurements of soil moisture, with respiration and photosynthesis into one graph (taking respiration and photosynthesis values from Fig 7 for the moisture levels shown in Fig 4) the graph below demonstrates how the dolomite storage of water would enable the Bristlecone pine to grow through this high elevation short growing season, from late spring snow melt in July to early fall snowfall in September and short summer (August):

This shows 5 weeks at the center of the growing season and that the growth continues for the whole period. This would apply to a theoretical sapling with root penetration to 20 cm. Older trees have deeper roots and would be able to access more water from greater depths.

The Bristlecone Pine chronology can be (and has been) cross-checked with Ponderosa Pine and Foxtail Pine chronologies for accuracy, but this doesn't necessarily demonstrate the accuracy and precision of dendrochronology.

How else can the accuracy and precision of this dendrochronology be checked? By cross-dating it with known historical data:

What Causes the Jet Stream to Change its Course?(7)

quote:
The correlation of volcanic eruptions and climate has been made relatively recently although the consequences of such eruptions have been recorded, albeit unwittingly, throughout history. For example, Roman poets tell us of the eruption of Mt. Etna in Sicily in 42 BC and at the same time an historian in China writes of a "veiled and indistinct" sun and crop failures. ...

2,040-year-old tree's rings read like global history(8)

quote:
Late-summer storms hurl hail against the granite slope.

The dawn air freezes all but six weeks of the year. There is no sign of soil.

But on this lonely ridge, the oldest known tree in Colorado's Pikes Peak region, a Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine, has been growing for 2,040 years.

The annual rings laid down in the stout trunk, however, are much more widely known. Decades ago, a local boy drilled a core sample no wider than a chopstick from the tree's trunk to reveal the rings.

Since then, scores of scientists have scrutinized the tiny dowel for insight into everything from ancient explosions and Aztec curses to global climate change.

In the 1950s, a group of scientists discovered a grove of bristlecones in California that was almost 5,000 years old, and, by overlapping cores from living and dead trees in the area, gradually built a tree-ring chronology dating back almost 9,000 years.

LaMarche took several cores back to the lab, where he noticed an odd pattern.

Under the microscope, the compact corduroy of rings revealed the normal alternating pattern of light bands of cells made each summer during the growing season and dark bands made at the end of the year as moisture drained from the living tissue in preparation for winter.

But the cores also showed dark bands where the cells were smashed and broken like a highway pileup. These were frost rings -- scars left from years when the freezing weather came too soon and ice formed in the cells, shredding the thin walls.

An occasional frost ring isn't unusual, but the cores from near Pikes Peak held almost 200, ...

In 42 B.C., when the tree was just a sapling, Sicily's Mount Etna exploded, spewing sulfurous gas into the sky.

The sun grew pale for months, crops withered in Europe. ... There is a frost ring that year.

In 1815, Tambora volcano in Indonesia detonated in the largest eruption in recorded history, filling the air with dust that cooled the whole Earth. Farmers in New England called it "the year without a summer." ... There is a frost ring that year.

The old trees form so many frost rings, Brunstein said, because they live at about 11,400 feet -- the tree line, where the slightest temperature dip can form ice in the cells.


Extreme Weather Events of 535–536(9)

quote:
The extreme weather events of 535–536 were the most severe and protracted short-term episodes of cooling in the Northern Hemisphere in the last 2,000 years.[1] The event is thought to have been caused by an extensive atmospheric dust veil, possibly resulting from a large volcanic eruption in the tropics,[2] or debris from space impacting the Earth.[3] Its effects were widespread, causing unseasonal weather, crop failures, and famines worldwide.[3]

Documentary evidence

The Byzantine historian Procopius recorded of 536, in his report on the wars with the Vandals, "during this year a most dread portent took place. For the sun gave forth its light without brightness...and it seemed exceedingly like the sun in eclipse, for the beams it shed were not clear."[4][5]

The Gaelic Irish Annals[6][7][8] record the following:

  • "A failure of bread in the year 536 AD" - the Annals of Ulster
  • "A failure of bread from the years 536–539 AD" - the Annals of Inisfallen

Scientific evidence

Tree ring analysis by dendrochronologist Mike Baillie, of the Queen's University of Belfast, shows abnormally little growth in Irish oak in 536 and another sharp drop in 542, after a partial recovery.[12] Similar patterns are recorded in tree rings from Sweden and Finland, in California's Sierra Nevada and in rings from Chilean Fitzroya trees.[citation needed] Ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica show evidence of substantial sulfate deposits around 533–534 ± 2 years, evidence of an extensive acidic dust veil.[2]


Volcanoes, ice-cores and tree-rings: one story or two?(10)

quote:
... In 1984 LaMarche and Hirschboeck suggested that frost rings in bristlecone pines were sometimes due to climatic upset caused by explosive volcanism. In 2007 Salzer and Hughes published a full list of frost damage years in bristlecone pines. These frost dates fit extremely well with extreme narrow growth in Grudd’s temperature sensitive northern Swedish chronology, Table 1 (d & e). Thus we are seeing replicated extreme environmental effects in trees in both the Old and New Worlds in 522, 536, 541-2 and 574-5. ...

Recent unprecedented tree-ring growth in bristlecone pine at the highest elevations and possible causes(11)

quote:
The Role of Temperature.

Korner (34) hypothesized that the upper treeline is created by the temperature limitation of trees' ability to form new tissue (sink inhibition) rather than by a shortage of photosynthate (source limitation). This global model of treeline suggests a narrow range of growing-season temperatures of treelines at different elevations around the globe and supports a common minimum temperature limit of tree growth (35). Recent direct observations of xylogenesis (wood formation) coupled with soil, air, and stem temperatures provide strong corroboration for temperature-limited growth in alpine and boreal conifers (36). The reported critical value of mean daily temperature for the onset of wood formation is 8 to 9 °C, a value that usually is not reached until mid to late June at treeline in the White Mountains. Maximum mean daily temperatures at SHP (11 °C) commonly are not reached until late July and are only slightly greater than the minimum reported for wood formation. ... Above the transition elevation (≈3,320 m to 3,470 m in the White Mountains), ring width is strongly positively associated with temperature and also is weakly positively associated with precipitation. Below the transition elevation, ring width is strongly negatively associated with temperature and also is strongly positively associated with precipitation.


Because the Bristlecone pines grow at such high elevations they have very short periods of growth when the temperature is only slightly higher than required for growth. It is entirely feasible that some years would not get warm enough to allow growth and this would result in missing rings that would make the chronology too young.

Thus there is 100% accuracy and precision of the Bristlecone Pine dendrochronology at 42 BCE, 536 CE and 1816 CE, correlating with actual historical events, as a start. This provides high confidence in the accuracy and precision of this chronology in specific and dendrochronology in general.

The earth is at least 8,713 years old (2013)

The minimum age for the earth is now at least 8,713 years old (2013), based on the accurate and precise Bristlecone Pine dendrochronology. This also means that there was no major catastrophic event that would have disturbed their growing on top of these mountains or dispersed any dead wood lying on the ground -- no world wide flood occurred in this time.

This is already older than many YEC models (6,000 years for those using Archbishop Usher's assumption filled calculations of a starting date of 4004 BCE).

And this is only the start of annual counting methods.

Enjoy.



References
  1. Ferguson, C.W., Graybill, D.A., Dendrochronology of Bristlecone Pine, Report, May 1985, Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, University of Arizona, http://ltrr.arizona.edu/...0of%20Bristlecone%20Pine_1985.pdf
  2. Fryer, Janet L. 2004. Pinus longaeva. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2013, November 24]: http://www.fs.fed.us/...ase/feis/plants/tree/pinlon/all.html
  3. Seiler, J., Jensen, E., Niemiera, A., Peterson, J., Great Basin bristlecone pine Pinaceae Pinus longaeva D.K. Bailey ID Fact Sheet, (c) 2012, Virginia Tech Dept of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation. [2013, November 24]: http://dendro.cnre.vt.edu/dendrology/syllabus/factsheet.cfm
  4. Fryer, Janet L. 2004. Pinus aristata. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: www.fs.fed.us/database/feis [ 2013, November 24]: http://www.fs.fed.us/...ase/feis/plants/tree/pinari/all.html
  5. Seiler, J., Jensen, E., Niemiera, A., Peterson, J., Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine Pinaceae Pinus aristata Engelm ID Fact Sheet, (c) 2012, Virginia Tech Dept of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation. [2013, November 24]: http://dendro.cnre.vt.edu/dendrology/syllabus/factsheet.cfm
  6. Wright, R. D., and H. A. Mooney, Substrate-oriented distribution of Bristlecone pine in the White Mountains of California, Amer. Midland Naturalist, vol 73 Nr 2, p 257-284, 1965 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2423454
  7. Patterns in Time web blog, What Causes the Jet Stream to Change its Course? 12 Jul 2011, [2013, November 24]: http://itsagriculture.blogspot.com/...eam-to-change-its.html
  8. Phillips, D., 2,040-year-old tree's rings read like global history
    http://www.contracostatimes.com/...cctimes/news/15591268.htm
  9. Wikipedia, Extreme weather events of 535–536, [2013, November 24]: http://en.wikipedia.org/...weather_events_of_535%E2%80%93536
  10. Baillie, M. G. L., Volcanoes, ice-cores and tree-rings: one story or two? Aniquity v84 2010: p 202–215 http://www.thefreelibrary.com/...story+or+two%3f-a0222486009
  11. Salzer, M.W., Hughes, M.K., Bunn, A.G., Kipfmueller, K.F., Recent unprecedented tree-ring growth in bristlecone pine at the highest elevations and possible causes, Biological Sciences - Environmental Sciences, PNAS 2009 106 (48) 20348-20353; published ahead of print November 16, 2009, doi:10.1073/pnas.0903029106 http://www.pnas.org/content/106/48/20348.full

Edited by RAZD, : subtitle

Edited by RAZD, : sp

Edited by RAZD, : changed ref 1 to more accurate article
chronology extends to 6700 BCE

Edited by RAZD, : not answered yet, so I updated it with new information


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by mindspawn, posted 11-26-2013 4:42 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 53 of 119 (712073)
11-26-2013 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by mindspawn
11-26-2013 5:35 AM


Re: Some annual rainfall weather information for your consideration
My problem with the Irish and German chronologies is that they only seem to match the Bristlecone Pine chronologies in ancient times. Even trees in close proximity to the White Mountain bristlecone pines do not show consistent chronology matches in recent times. ...

An assertion contradicted by facts. Perhaps you could provide a link to show this lack of consistency rather than just assert it.

Or did you misinterpret the information I provided in Message 41?

... MY conclusion from the soil/weather of the White Mountains is that the nature of wood growth absolutely requires multiple rings there, ...

But that's not a conclusion it is an a priori assumption based on fantasy, working backwards from belief, and unsupported by evidence.

And I have shown this to be a false assertion, most recently in Message 51. You are wrong about the soil and wrong about the weather, and your magical mysterious 11-12 stress rings (a) would be identified by an average dendrochronologist and (b) would have to be on the order of 1/2" of rain in weekly installments -- hardly stressful conditions for any tree, and certainly not stressful for the hardy Bristlecone pines that have evolved to handle the extreme ecology they inhabit, including the ability to store and use water over extended periods. The more extreme inhabitants grow on dolomite because it provides another storehouse of water.

... , and their match with Europe's trees during the Middle/Early holocene indicates that in fact Irish and German chronologies ALSO had multiple rings during the Middle/Early Holocene. ...

Except that this doesn't show why the pattern is exactly, precisely, and accurately the same ... with only 0.5% error over thousands of years.

This is just you making stuff up to try to resolve the dissonance caused by this information.

... Thus early and Middle Holocene dates are out by thousands of years due to the dry weather and intermittent summer rainfalls of the early/middle Holocene causing multiple tree ring growth.

Again, that's not a conclusion it is an a priori assumption based on fantasy, working backwards from belief, and unsupported by evidence.

The following link is to indicate early holocene dry weather and reduced summer rainfall patterns which match the current weather conditions of the BCP trees in the White Mountains:

Can you show this match graphically? or is it just another completely non-evidenced assertion?

http://hol.sagepub.com/content/16/2/153.abstract
"We show (i) that winters were drier and summers shorter and cooler in western Europe during colder periods in Greenland, (ii) in contrast to the present-day climate in the Holzmaar region, summer rains were clearly reduced during the early Holocene, and (iii) the climate not only changed rapidly (< 5 years) but recurring drier events were common during the studied period."

Reduced and drier do not mean drought ...

And as I have said before, that is not really news (Message 28):

The 12,460-year Hohenheim oak and pine tree-ring chronology from central Europe—a unique annual record for radiocarbon calibration and paleoenvironment reconstructions. Radiocarbon 46, No 3, pages 1111–1122. here with the Full PDF Download Here

quote:
... With respect to the Younger Dryas-Preboreal transition identified in the ring width of our pines at 11,590 BP, the absolute tree-ring chronology now covers the entire Holocene and 820 yr of the Younger Dryas.

... The individual ages of the subfossil oaks are surprisingly short. The mean age of all sampled oaks is only 176 yr, with a maximum age of 575 yr. Some 97% of all trees were younger than 300 yr (Figure 2). This fact is related to the regular occurrence of floods connected with extensive erosion, which often disturbed riparian forests. On the other hand, the good growing conditions on the flood-plains, especially after the mid-Holocene, allowed large annual growth increments resulting in huge, but young, trees with a stem diameter of more than 1 m. ...


The entire Holocene (modern era) is now covered by the German oak/pine chronology, including the climate information shown in the tree ring widths. The trees used grew in the flood plain near rivers, meaning you need to show that the rivers dried up for substantial durations and then cram that in to 11-12 mysterious magical growing events. You haven't even begun to show this.

A poor growing season means a narrow ring, not multiple rings. In addition if there were a significant stress event it would show up as a stress ring rather than a winter ring.

Message 51: ... the part you quoted tells you and shows you the difference between stress rings and end-of-year rings:

quote:
... The key to distinguishing between double or false rings and annual rings lies in the nature of the transition between the latewood and earlywood cells: in a false or double ring the transition is gradual due to the phasing in and out of favorable growing conditions (Fig. 3).

In an annual tree ring, the transition from one ring’s latewood to the next ring’s earlywood is abrupt because ring production actually stopped for some period of time, typically during winter. ...


Look at the rings just to the right of the false band and the ones just to the right of the winter band - are they remotely the same?

The difference is readily apparent to dendrochronologists, especially for deciduous trees like oaks. Not only is there a difference in cell size, but the walls are thinner in early growth than in later growth.

ie perfect conditions for multiple tree rings existed in Europe (dry cold climate with rare rainfall in the warmer growth season), dates are therefore over-estimated.

Again, that's not a conclusion it is an a priori assumption based on fantasy, working backwards from belief, and unsupported by evidence.

You are grasping at straws here. You need to show actual evidence of your mysterious magical events, not just presuppose them.

I'll let you respond to these and the next two post (one about Irish oaks and one about German oaks and pines) before posting anymore.

Meantime I have requested a copy of your Holocene climate paper so I can see what it says beyond the abstract.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : ...


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by mindspawn, posted 11-26-2013 5:35 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 5:51 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 54 of 119 (712076)
11-26-2013 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by mindspawn
11-26-2013 5:35 AM


Irish Oak
As we saw in Message 52, Bristlecone Pines, there are two other dendrochronologies of interest in measuring the age of the earth by counting annual layers: the Irish oak and the German oak (and pine) chronologies.

My recollection is that dendrochronology started with oak trees in Europe, by setting up a database of oak tree sections from archaeological sites and matching different sections that overlapped in time to build a complete lineage of tree ring dates.

Unlike the Bristlecone pines the Irish oak is not environmentally challenged:

Northern Ireland: climate(1)

quote:
The seasonal variation of rainfall in Northern Ireland is less marked in the drier southern and eastern areas than in the wetter areas, but in all areas the wettest months are between October and January. This is partly a reflection of the high frequency of winter Atlantic depressions and the relatively low frequency of summer thunderstorms in Northern Ireland. For example, at Armagh, thunder occurs on an average of less than 4 days a year, compared with 15 to 20 days at many places in England. Only in a few locations, mainly away from the coast, does the frequency of thunder exceed 5 days a year.

Aldergrove Rainfall Colerain University Rainfall Corgary Rainfall Spelga Dam Rainfall

Over much of Northern Ireland, the number of days with a rainfall total of 1mm or more ('wet days') tends to follow a pattern similar to the monthly rainfall totals. In the higher parts, over 55 days is the norm in winter (December to February) and over 45 days in summer (June to August). In the driest areas around Lough Neagh and eastwards to Strangford Lough, less than 45 days in winter and about 35 days in summer are typical.


Thus we can have high confidence that the tree rings are annual layers and not due to environmental factors.

The common name for this species is "Post Oak" due to its natural resistance to rot thus making a good material for posts in ancient constructions. This also means that there are a lot of samples that are referenced to and associated with archaeological finds, finds that can be dated by other means, including historical documents as far back as the history goes. Oaks are also considered one of the best species for dendrochronology.

Useful Tree Species for Tree-Ring Dating(2)

quote:
Oak is a highly preferred species to use in dendrochronology - in fact, the longest continuous tree-ring chronology anywhere in the world was developed in Europe and is currently about 10,000 year in length. This chronology is providing scientists new insights on climate over the past 10,000 years, especially at the end of the last Glacial Maximum.

Because ring-porous species almost always begin annual growth with this initial flush, missing rings are rare in such species as oak and elm. In fact, the only recorded instance of a missing ring in oak trees occurred in the year 1816, also known as the Year Without a Summer. A volcanic eruption in the year 1815 caused much cooler temperatures globally, thus causing oak trees to remain dormant. Therefore, no clear annual ring was formed in 1816 for certain locations in Europe.

... The earlywood is marked by large vessels used in conducting water. Latewood appears darker, marked by smaller vessels. Occasionally, offsets in oak tree rings can be problematic when trying to crossdate the rings. Dendrochronologists therefore must be careful when working with oak species, as these rays can cause a misdate of one year.


Note that sources of error are identified and accounted for. Crossdating is one method to check for errors. Another is to build two independent chronologies from the same species in two different locations. For an idea of the accuracy of the data and the amount of error involved we have this:

INTCAL04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 0-26 CAL KYR BP, PDF(3)

quote:
For inclusion in the calibration data set, dendrochronological dating and cross-checking of tree rings is required. ...

The Holocene part of the 14C calibration is based on several millennia-long tree-ring chronologies, providing an annual, absolute time frame within the possible error of the dendrochronology, which was rigorously tested by internal replication of many overlapping sections. Whenever possible, they were cross-checked with independently established chronologies of adjacent regions. The German and Irish oak chronologies were cross-dated until back into the 3rd millennium BC (Pilcher et al. 1984), ...

The Belfast Data Set

Recent 14C measurements of α-cellulose extracted from decadal sections of Belfast Irish oak over the past 1000 yr (Hogg et al. 2002) and for the period 1220–1460 BP (McCormac et al., this issue) have been included. Comparisons of these measurements with the 1986 and 1993 Irish oak data sets (Pearson et al. 1993; Pearson et al. 1986), as well as with Irish oak measurements made in Seattle, resulted in the acceptance of the original 1986 Irish oak data sets over the corrected 1993 data sets (Hogg et al. 2002). Decadal measurements from the 1986 data set have been included separately rather than averaged to bidecadal intervals, where possible. In cases where decadal measurements had been averaged with bidecadal measurements, the original bidecadal data could not be retrieved, so are included as published. In those cases, the decadal data are redundant and are not included. The pre-1993 oak measurements were made on samples processed to holocellulose (Pearson et al. 1986). German oak measurements are used as originally published (Pearson et al. 1993). A further 3 decadal samples of Irish oak from 3450–3470 cal BP were measured to check the earlier Irish oak bidecadal data where they differed considerably from the German oak. These samples were pretreated to α-cellulose at Queen’s University Belfast and measured at both Queen’s University Belfast and the Center for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

The Arizona Data Set

The relation between North American and European wood has been studied using bristlecone pine (BCP) and European oak (German oak and Irish oak), respectively. Discrepancies have become evident over the years, in particular when the German oak was corrected by a dendro-shift of 41 yr towards older ages (Kromer et al. 1996). Attempts were made to resolve the discrepancies by remeasuring BCP samples, measured earlier in Tucson (Linick et al. 1986). The University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research provided dendrochronologically-dated bristlecone pine samples to Heidelberg (wood from around 4700 and 7600 cal BP), Groningen (around 7500 cal BP), Pretoria (around 4900 cal BP), and Seattle (around 7600 cal BP). The replicate measurements have a mean offset of 37 +/- 6 14C yr (n = 21) from the Tucson measurements. Applying this shift to the Tucson data results in a close fit to the wiggles of the German oak, which would not occur if there were an error in the dendrochronology of either series. Because of this offset, the IntCal working group has decided not to include the BCP record in IntCal04.


The Bristlecone Pine is not included in the calibration data because it is 37 years younger than the two oak chronologies at 7600 BP (before 1950). This is an error of only 0.48% at 5650 BCE, which is very high accuracy.

High-precision 14C measurement of Irish oaks to show the natural 14C variations from AD 1840 to 5210 BC(4)

quote:
ABSTRACT. High-precision measurement of dendrochronologically dated Irish oak at bi-decade/decade intervals has continued in the Belfast laboratory, extending the 14C data base from ca AD 1840 to 5210 BC. The dendrochronology is now considered absolute (see Belfast dendrochronology this conference) (Brown et al, 1986) and a continuous detailed curve is presented, showing the natural variations in the atmospheric concentration of 14C over >7000 years. Each data point has a precision of <2.5 ‰, and some 4500 years have now been compared with Seattle, giving excellent agreement.

The ‰ symbol is parts per thousand, so this is <0.25% error in >7000 years for the Irish oak. This chronology extends back to 5210 BCE.

High-precision 14C measurement of German and Irish oaks to show the natural 14C variations from 7890 to 5000 BC.(5)

quote:
... Some 7000 yr of decadal and bidecadal measurements of Irish oak were presented graphically, and are used as a `Radiocarbon Time-Scale Calibration'. These curves are now extended by another 2680 yr, forming a complete sequence back to 7980 BC, giving almost 10,000 yr of high-precision time-scale calibration.

The chronology now extends back to 7980 BCE, or 9930 BP (before 1950), slightly longer than the Bristlecone Pine chronology. The significant point though, is not the extension of the annual layer count, but the consilience of the data from the two systems ... as noted in Message 3 they agree to within 37 years at 7600 BP, an error of only 0.48% at 5650 BCE, which is very high accuracy. This consiliency adds to our confidence in the accuracy and precision of the data.

As we saw in Message 52 there was evidence of volcanoes in the tree rings of both Bristlecone Pines and Irish oaks:

Extreme Weather Events of 535–536

quote:
The extreme weather events of 535–536 were the most severe and protracted short-term episodes of cooling in the Northern Hemisphere in the last 2,000 years.[1] The event is thought to have been caused by an extensive atmospheric dust veil, possibly resulting from a large volcanic eruption in the tropics,[2] or debris from space impacting the Earth.[3] Its effects were widespread, causing unseasonal weather, crop failures, and famines worldwide.[3]

Tree ring analysis by dendrochronologist Mike Baillie, of the Queen's University of Belfast, shows abnormally little growth in Irish oak in 536 ...


So there is consilience between history and the Irish oak chronology: 100% accuracy and precision at 1816 CE and 536 CE, the same as the Bristlecone pine: three independent sources of information with the same values. This high consilience gives us high confidence in the accuracy and precision of the Irish oak chronology (and increases our confidence in the Bristlecone pine chronology).

Then there is Egyptian history and the dating of various finds:

Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt(6)

quote:
... Radiocarbon dating, which is a two-stage process involving isotope measurements and then calibration against similar measurements made on dendrochronologically dated wood, usually gives age ranges of 100 to 200 years for this period (95% probability range) and has previously been too imprecise to resolve these questions.

Here, we combine several classes of data to overcome these limitations in precision: measurements on archaeological samples that accurately reflect past fluctuations in radiocarbon activity, specific information on radiocarbon activity in the region of the Nile Valley, direct linkages between the dated samples and the historical chronology, and relative dating information from the historical chronology. Together, these enable us to match the patterns present in the radiocarbon dates with the details of the radiocarbon calibration record and, thus, to synchronize the scientific and historical dating methods. ...

... We have 128 dates from the NK, 43 from the MK, and 17 from the Old Kingdom (OK). The majority (~75%) of the measurements have calibrated age ranges that overlap with the conventional historical chronology, within the wide error limits that result from the calibration of individual dates.

The modeling of the data provides a chronology that extends from ~2650 to ~1100 B.C.E. ...


This figure shows the distribution of uncalibrated radiocarbon dates against the modeled age. For each measurement, we show the mean and ±1σ of the radiocarbon and modeled calendar dates: ... The calibration curve is shown as two black lines (±1σ ). ...

The results for the OK, although lower in resolution, also agree with the consensus chronology of Shaw (18) but have the resolution to contradict some suggested interpretations of the evidence, such as the astronomical hypothesis of Spence (24), which is substantially later, or the reevaluation of this hypothesis (25), which leads to a date that is earlier. The absence of astronomical observations in the papyrological record for the OK means that this data set provides one of the few absolute references for the positioning of this important period of Egyptian history (Fig. 1A).


Note that there are several other sample dates with similar correlation of 14C measurement to dendrochronology correlations, here it is the earliest/oldest set that is of interest as a measure of accuracy and precision.

The earliest/oldest date in Fig 2 is ~2660 BCE with 7 samples and an average raw 14C 'age' of 4120 to 4130 BP (before 1950), which can then be compared against the 14C 'age' on the dendrochronology correlation to find the comparable dendrochronology calendar age. The dendrochronology correlation is shown as two lines in Fig 2

The Shaw date (red bar in Fig 1A) is ~2660 BCE based on historical documentation.

Converting the raw 14C 'age' of 4125 BP to dendrochronologial calendar age using the IntCal04(3) correlation curves (which uses the Irish oak dendrochronology) gives a date range of ~2700 BCE (minus 1&sigma line intersept) to ~2620 BCE (plus 1&sigma line intersept) for an average dendro age of ~2660+/-40 BCE. Note that +/-40 years in over 4,000 years is an error of +/-1%. The error is partly due to the two stage process of using 14C data to convert to dendrochronological calendar age.

Note that this conversion does not depend on the calculation of 14C 'age' -- that is a purely mathematical conversion of the measured amounts of 14C and 12C in the samples, and then comparing those 14C/12C values to ones found in the tree rings to find the best match to the tree rings, but it does introduce an error due to the band of rings that match those levels.

So we have another historical calibration date of 2660 BCE with 99% consilience between history and Irish oak chronology. This chronology extends back to 7980 BCE, to 9930 BP (before 1950), and now ~1/2 of its length is anchored by historical events\artifacts, and most of it's length, to 8650 BCE, is consilient with the Bristlecone pine chronology with 99.5% accuracy and precision. This results in very high confidence for the accuracy and precision of the chronology.

The earth is at least 9,993 years old (2013)

The minimum age for the earth is now at least 9,993 years old (2013), based on the highly accurate and precise Irish oak dendrochronology. This also means that there was no major catastrophic event that would have disturbed the growth of any of the overlapping trees -- no world wide flood occurred in this time.

This is already significantly older than many YEC models (6,000 years for those using Archbishop Usher's assumption filled calculations of a starting date of 4004 BC).

And this is still only the start of annual counting methods.

Enjoy.



References
  1. Met Office, Northern Ireland: climate, (c) Crown copyright, www.metoffice.gov.uk [2013, November 24]: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/ni/print.html
  2. Martinez, L., Useful Tree Species for Tree-Ring Dating, Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, University of Arizona updated Oct. 2001 [2013, November 24]: http://www.ltrr.arizona.edu/lorim/good.html
  3. Reimer, P. J., Baillie, M.G.L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W., Bertrand, C. J. H., Blackwell, P. G., Buck, C. E., Burr, G. S., Cutler, K. B., Damon, P. E., Edwards, R. L., Fairbanks, R. G., Friedrich, M., Guilderson, T. P., Hogg, A. G., Hughen, K. A., Kromer, B., McCormac, G., Manning, S., Ramsey, C. B., Reimer, R. W., Remmele, S., Southon, J. R., Stuiver, M., INTCAL04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 0-26 CAL KYR BP, Radiocarbon, Vol 46, Nr 3, 2004, p 1029–1058 https://digitalcommons.library.arizona.edu/objectviewer?o...
  4. Pearson GW, Pilcher JR, Baillie MGL, Corbett DM, Qua F. 1986. High-precision 14C measurement of Irish oaks to show the natural 14C variations from AD 1840 to 5210 BC. Radiocarbon 28(2B):911–34. https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/...icle/download/1004/1009
  5. Pearson GW, Becker B, Qua F. 1993. High-precision 14C measurement of German and Irish oaks to show the natural 14C variations from 7890 to 5000 BC. Radiocarbon 35(1):93–104. https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/...icle/download/1555/1559

Edited by Admin, : Narrow image slightly.

Edited by Admin, : Narrow image slightly again.

Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.

Edited by RAZD, : added egypt


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by mindspawn, posted 11-26-2013 5:35 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 7:09 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 55 of 119 (712077)
11-26-2013 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by mindspawn
11-26-2013 5:35 AM


German Oak and Pine

German Oak and Pine

As we saw in Message 52, Bristlecone Pines, there are two other dendrochronologies of interest in measuring the age of the earth by counting annual layers: the Irish oak, covered in Message 54, and the German oak (and pine) chronologies.

Also unlike the Bristlecone pines the German oak and pine is not environmentally challenged:

Germany Climate Statistics(1)

Berlin, Germany Munich, Germany Potsdam, Germany Schleswig, Germany

These rainfall records are different from each other, and they are different from the Irish records ( Message 54). They also show sufficient rainfall in any one month that the trees would not be water limited in their growth. The months of highest rain are in the summer as opposed to Ireland when they were in the winter, so the correlation of the rings does not depend on weather events.Thus we can have high confidence that the tree rings are annual layers and not due to environmental factors.

INTCAL04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 0-26 CAL KYR BP, PDF(2)

quote:
The Holocene part of the 14C calibration is based on several millennia-long tree-ring chronologies, providing an annual, absolute time frame within the possible error of the dendrochronology, which was rigorously tested by internal replication of many overlapping sections. Whenever possible, they were cross-checked with independently established chronologies of adjacent regions. The German and Irish oak chronologies were cross-dated until back into the 3rd millennium BC (Pilcher et al. 1984), and the German oak chronologies from the Main River, built independently in the Gottingen and Hohenheim tree-ring laboratories, cross-date back to 9147 cal BP (Spurk et al. 1998).

Due to periodic narrow rings caused by cockchafer beetles, some German oak samples were excluded from IntCal98. Analysis of these tree rings, with an understanding of the response of trees to the cockchafer damage, allowed some of these measurements to be re-instated in the chronology (Friedrich et al., this issue).

The relation between North American and European wood has been studied using bristlecone pine (BCP) and European oak (German oak and Irish oak), respectively. Discrepancies have become evident over the years, in particular when the German oak was corrected by a dendro-shift of 41 yr towards older ages (Kromer et al. 1996). Attempts were made to resolve the discrepancies by remeasuring BCP samples, measured earlier in Tucson (Linick et al. 1986). The University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research provided dendrochronologically dated bristlecone pine samples to Heidelberg (wood from around 4700 and 7600 cal BP), Groningen (around 7500 cal BP), Pretoria (around 4900 cal BP), and Seattle (around 7600 cal BP). The replicate measurements have a mean offset of 37 +/- 6 14C yr (n = 21) from the Tucson measurements.

There was not a large difference in the calculated k values between early and recent measurements in the Belfast lab for the Irish oak samples when the previously applied laboratory error multiplier on the more recent data set is considered; however, the early measurements of German oak were more variable than those of Irish oak. The recent Heidelberg data sets had smaller k values than older measurements. The reason for the early variation is partly due to the fact that these samples were measured to help place a tree in the dendrochronology as it was being built instead of measured consecutively, and also because many of these samples contain only a few tree rings but are being compared to decadal samples.

Uncertainty in single-ring cal ages for dendrochronologically-dated wood is on the order of 1 yr for highly replicated and cross-checked chronologies and is therefore ignored in the analysis.


There are several things to note here. First, is that there are three (3) main chronologies: one of Bristlecone Pine and two of European Oak, one German and one Irish. Second, is that originally one oak chronology was "not good enough" to be included in the IntCal98 - because it was off by 41 years in ~8,000 years, an error of 0.51%. Third, is that when the oak chronology was corrected, it was not the odd one out, but the one that previously agreed with the Bristlecone Pine chronology. Fourth, the Bristlecone Pine chronology is now considered "not good enough" - because it is off by 37 years in 7,600 years, an error of 0.48%. Fifth, that where some German Oak samples had been placed by carbon-14 levels in the earlier chronology (used in IntCal98) these are now placed by additional tree samples that fill in the consecutive chronology (and the initial carbon-14 levels are not now used to place those samples). Finally, that the European Oak absolute chronology now extends back to 9,147 years BP with cross dating, and that including all three in one data set means that the error involved is on the order of 0.5% - over the whole period of time covered. The IntCal04 discussion doesn't give the breakdown on the actual ages of each chronology, but it refers to a paper that does.

The 12,460-year Hohenheim oak and pine tree-ring chronology from Central Europe - a unique annual record for radiocarbon calibration and paleoenvironment reconstructions(3)

quote:
The combined oak and pine tree-ring chronologies of Hohenheim University are the backbone of the Holocene radiocarbon calibration for central Europe. Here, we present the revised Holocene oak chronology (HOC) and the Preboreal pine chronology (PPC) with respect to revisions, critical links, and extensions. ...

We have indicated the revisions and extensions of the combined oak and pine tree-ring chronology for central Europe constructed at Hohenheim University. This chronology forms the backbone of the Holocene 14C calibration. The Holocene oak chronology (HOC) has been strengthened by new trees starting at 10,429 BP (8480 BC). Oaks affected by cockchafer predation have been identified and removed from the chronology. The formerly floating Preboreal pine chronology (PPC) has been cross-matched dendrochronologically to the absolutely dated oak chronology. In addition, the 2 parts of the PPC were linked dendrochronologically. Including the 8-yr shift of the oak-pine link, the older part of the PPC (pre-11,250 BP) needs to be shifted 70 yr to older ages with respect to the published data (Spurk et al. 1998). The southern German part of the PPC now covers 2103 yr from 11,993 to 9891 BP (10,044–7942 BC). Furthermore, the PPC was extended significantly by new pine chronologies from Avenches and Zürich, Switzerland, and by the pine chronology from the Younger Dryas forest at Cottbus, eastern Germany. The absolutely dated tree-ring chronology now starts at 12,410 cal BP (10,461 BC). Therefore, the tree-ring-based 14C calibration now reaches back into the mid-Younger Dryas. ...


The German oak chronology extends back to 10,429 BP (before 1950) or 8489 BCE. The Preboreal pine chronology has been absolutely linked to the oak chronology and extends back to 12,410 cal BP, or 10,461 BCE.

Note that "floating" chronologies are ones not tied to an absolutely known date as occurs with "absolute" chronologies. There are many other floating dendrochronologies, including some that extend further into the past, but they are not discussed here as they can't be tied by climate correlations to the existing absolute dendrochronologies.

Note further that carbon-14 measurements and age calculations are not discussed yet, as the focus is on the accuracy and precision of the tree ring chronologies. These chronologies have been tied to the historical record back to 42 BCE, and there are indications that other volcanic events are also recorded further in the past, with data that shows up in the ice core dating ... which will be discussing later.

The earth is at least 12,473 years old (2013)

The minimum age for the earth is now at least 12,473 years old (2013), based on the highly accurate and precise German oak and pine dendrochronology. This also means that there was no major catastrophic event that would have disturbed the growth of any of the overlapping trees -- no world wide flood occurred in this time.

This is significantly older than many YEC models (6,000 years for those using Archbishop Usher's assumption filled calculations of a starting date of 4004 BC).

And this is still only the start of annual counting methods.

Enjoy.



References
  1. El Dorado Weather, Germany Climate Statistics, (c) 2013 El Dorado Weather, Inc, http://www.eldoradocountyweather.com/ [2013, November 25]: http://www.eldoradocountyweather.com/...te-listings-a-z.html, http://www.eldoradocountyweather.com/.../germany/Berlin.html, http://www.eldoradocountyweather.com/.../germany/Munich.html, http://www.eldoradocountyweather.com/...germany/Potsdam.html, and http://www.eldoradocountyweather.com/...rmany/Schleswig.html
  2. Reimer, P. J., Baillie, M.G.L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W., Bertrand, C. J. H., Blackwell, P. G., Buck, C. E., Burr, G. S., Cutler, K. B., Damon, P. E., Edwards, R. L., Fairbanks, R. G., Friedrich, M., Guilderson, T. P., Hogg, A. G., Hughen, K. A., Kromer, B., McCormac, G., Manning, S., Ramsey, C. B., Reimer, R. W., Remmele, S., Southon, J. R., Stuiver, M., INTCAL04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 0-26 CAL KYR BP, Radiocarbon, Vol 46, Nr 3, 2004, p 1029–1058 https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/...icle/download/4167/3592
  3. Friedrich, Michael et al, The 12,460-Year Hohenheim Oak and Pine Tree-Ring Chronology from Central Europe - a Unique Annual Record for Radiocarbon Calibration and Paleoenvironment Reconstructions, Radiocarbon, Volume 46, Nr 3, 2004, p 1111-1122 https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/...icle/download/4172/3597

Edited by RAZD, : 42 not 44

Edited by RAZD, : sp

Edited by RAZD, : link


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by mindspawn, posted 11-26-2013 5:35 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 60 of 119 (712105)
11-27-2013 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by mindspawn
11-27-2013 2:34 AM


Re: Uranium and Thorium
Nice one, looking at your link I see they did use the specific activity method to determine the half life of Thorium 230, have you got any evidence for how the half-life of Uranium 234 was established?

For now let's look at the "well known" value for 238:

http://prc.aps.org/abstract/PRC/v4/i5/p1889_1

quote:
New determinations of the half-lives of 235U and 238U have been made. Improved techniques have allowed the half-life values to be measured with greater accuracy than has been heretofore achieved. Samples were prepared by molecular plating and counted in a intermediate-geometry α-proportional counter with an extremely flat pulse-height plateau. The small amount of residual nonplated uranium was counted in a 2π counter. Energy analysis with a silicon-junction detector was used to measure the presence of "foreign" activities. For 235U, the measured specific activity was (4798.1±3.3) (dis/min)/(mg 235U), corresponding to a half-life of (7.0381+/-0.0048) × 10^8 yr. For 238U, the specific activity was measured as (746.19+/-0.41) (dis/min)/(mg 238U), corresponding to a half-life of (4.4683+/-0.0024) × 10^9 yr. Errors quoted are statistical (standard error of the mean), based upon the observed scatter of the data. This scatter exceeds that expected from counting statistics alone. We believe that systematic errors, if present, will no more than double the quoted errors.

So that is two of the three isotopes/elements.

Whether we look at Thorium 230, Uranium 234, Uranium 238 or carbon dating, we have the same problem that the magnetic field effect on radiocarbon and radioactive elements is largely unknown and has to be calibrated against an additional source of accurate dates. ...

uh ... nope. The magnetic field has no measurable effect on the rate of decay of any element/isotope.

It affects the production of 14C in the atmosphere by gamma rays hitting Nitrogen atoms:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/carbon-14.htm/printable (5)

quote:
Cosmic rays enter the earth's atmosphere in large numbers every day. For example, every person is hit by about half a million cosmic rays every hour. It is not uncommon for a cosmic ray to collide with an atom in the atmosphere, creating a secondary cosmic ray in the form of an energetic neutron, and for these energetic neutrons to collide with nitrogen atoms. When the neutron collides, a nitrogen-14 (seven protons, seven neutrons) atom turns into a carbon-14 atom (six protons, eight neutrons) and a hydrogen atom (one proton, zero neutrons). Carbon-14 is radioactive, with a half-life of about 5,700 years.

This takes energy to accomplish, and the decay releases this energy: Carbon-14 decays back to Nitrogen-14 by beta- decay:

http://education.jlab.org/glossary/betadecay.html (7)

quote:

During beta-minus decay, a neutron in an atom's nucleus turns into a proton, an electron and an antineutrino. The electron and antineutrino fly away from the nucleus, which now has one more proton than it started with. Since an atom gains a proton during beta-minus decay, it changes from one element to another. For example, after undergoing beta-minus decay, an atom of carbon (with 6 protons) becomes an atom of nitrogen (with 7 protons).


Thus cosmic ray activity produces a "Carbon-14 environment" in the atmosphere, where Carbon-14 is being produced or replenished while also being removed by radioactive decay due to a short half-life. This results is a variable but fairly stable proportion of atmospheric Carbon-14 for absorption from the atmosphere by plants during photosynthesis in the proportions of 12C and 14C existing in the atmosphere at the time.

... To check carbon dating against radioactive dating does not promote confidence when both forms of dating underwent the same proportionate increase in magnetic field strength a few thousand years ago, and both decay rates are affected by the magnetic field.

What is being checked by correlating 14C levels against known calendar dates is the amount of 14C in the atmosphere at the time samples were living and getting carbon from the atmosphere. This level is well known to vary with sunspot activity (generation of gamma rays) and with earth's magnetic field that protects the earth from gamma rays.

The decay rate for carbon-14 is also well known: λ14C is 5730 years +/- 40 (Godwin, 1962), and this has been discussed before ( Message 22)

the reference list from the paper with that graph is presented for reference was provided in Message 28, and it is no 48: Godwin, H., 1962. Half-life of radiocarbon. Nature 195, 984.

The variable that is being calibrated by these correlations is not λ14C but No, as previously discussed in Message 42:

quote:
This curve can certainly be used to calibrate the raw 14C age calculation to account for variations in the 14C atmospheric concentrations that were in effect at each age and obtain dates closer to accurate calendar dates (generally younger than the raw 14C dates):

  • λ14C is 5730 years +/- 40 - Message 22
  • the raw 14C age formula is: t = {ln(Nf/No)/ln(1/2)}•λ14C
  • Where No is the original level of the C-14 isotope in the sample (when it was alive and growing and absorbing atmospheric C-14), and Nf is the amount remaining.

So now we can calculate what No was for each age:

Nf/No = (1/2)^(t/λ14C)

No = Nf•2^(t/5740)

Note that it is not the decay rate that is calibrated by the dendrochronology (that is determined in the lab), but the proportion of 14C/12C in the atmosphere at the time the sample grew (used atmospheric carbon).


Conclusion: Ur-Th dating as with carbon dating underwent the same magnetic field effects to the decay rates in the past, therefore their consilience. However the dates are inaccurate because the magnetic field was a lot stronger back then.

Pure hokum, likely due to misunderstanding what is known and what is being calibrated.

Ur-Th dating is not affected by the magnetic field to any measurable degree. So no, that does not explain the consilience.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 2:34 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by mindspawn, posted 11-28-2013 2:37 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 61 of 119 (712110)
11-27-2013 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by mindspawn
11-27-2013 4:09 AM


Re: Dendrochronology Basics
Yes I did say that I quoted the relevant parts, that is why I included that comment about stress rings. I then explained that bristlecone pines are continuously under temperature/moisture stress owing to the dryness of the soil. If you look at the weather and soil of the white Mountains there is no gradual "phasing in and out of favorable conditions". ie conditions do not favor stress rings, they favor multiple rings due to the complete dry-out between rain spells.

Another claim made without evidence. Your whole argument rests on your "dryness of the soil" which is false -- the trees grow on rock outcroppings and preferentially grow on dolomite because it retains moisture. Only in the winter when the water freezes does this supply stop.

Irrelevant because in the White Mountains the conditions do not favor stress rings due to the lack of "gradual phasing in and out of favorable growing conditions". Each summer rainfall followed by a dry spell of a few weeks favors a whole new growth ring, this is how wood actually grows.

Relevant because it shows you are grasping at straws rather than confronting actual evidence. And you don't have "a few weeks" between rainfalls for you mysterious magical 11-12 events per year -- the growing season is 6 to 12 weeks: you have a week or less between your hypothetical events, and the amount of rain in them is 1/2" or less.

Claiming it is irrelevant is a symptom of cognitive dissonance, a way for you to tell yourself lies to reduce the dissonance.

This has been your only good point so far regarding my claim of multiple rings. If you can prove that the reserves of these specific trees in especially dry areas cause continuous growth for many weeks without rainfall your point is made. Until then its more logical that after a few weeks of dry spell in one of the driest soils on earth, the tree would stop producing wood until the next summer rainfall.

Time for you to actually read up and learn: it is typical behavior of all trees to build up a storage of water when available and use it later -- all you need to do is look at all the vegetation that lives in deserts.

And again -- you don't have "many weeks" without rain - the growing season is 6 to 12 weeks, divide that by your mysterious magical 11-12 events per year and you have half a week to a week ... between small rainfalls of 1/2" or less.

You also have trees that have adapted to their ecology by growing on dolomite because it absorbs more water than the surrounding sandstone.

If dendrochronologists overlook an obvious fact that trees completely starved of moisture during their growth season do actually stop growing , then this is incompetent. In their defense though they wouldn't want their findings to contradict evolutionary timeframes and bring down the ridicule of the establishment, so its the establishment's fault that open-mindedness has been replaced by an almost religious fervour to support evolution and mock those who question it. This mocking attitude of the establishment is suppressing true science in much the same manner as some members of this board resort to swearing and ridicule instead of a pleasant exchange of ideas. Oh well.....

Or it could just be evidence that you are wrong. Note once again that this paragraph is ripe with evidence of cognitive dissonance, full of the made up assertions (lies) you tell yourself to reduce your personal dissonance.

Again you refer to "evolutionary time-frames" something that is non-existent.

You refer to ridicule of the establishment, when in science a scientist hopes to overturn previous knowledge and improve on what has gone before -- actual science that shows previous conclusions were false is welcomed.

and "almost religious fervour to support evolution and mock those who question it" is your conspiracy theory again.

If the overlaps are easily demonstrated with Bristlecone pines, then please demonstrate it. Like I said before, if the actual cross-dating rings had as much overlap as the diagrammatic representation, that would be a convincing case. But even if you match barcodes of four categories (thin, thick, black, white) they would show a statistical tendency of a perfect match of 4 bars every 336 bars using a random starting point. So the length of matching sequence is essential to reduce the obvious statistical probability of an error in sequence matching.

It's simple maths, the trees live for thousands of years, you have specimens that are 5000 to 7000 years old, there are hundreds of trees, the chronology spans almost 8,000 years, therefor overlaps of thousands of years is more likely than not.

and they are not using only four bars look again at the diagram:

A, B and C are the specimens that were collected, they are matched A to B for the entire overlap period and they are matched B to C for the entire overlap period, not just where the arrows are.

Your math is questionable because there are many more than four variable widths in tree rings.

not quite cognitive dissonance.
"Note that Foxtail pines (Pinus balfouriana) are closely related to Bristlecone pines ((Pinus longaeva), but the ranges of Great Basin bristlecone, Rocky Mountain bristlecone, and Foxtail pines do not overlap. The Colorado-Green River drainage has separated the 2 Bristlecone pine species for millennia. All three species are used to cross-check the Bristlecone Pine chronology."

Your quote appears to indicate that they cannot rely only on one species for the full chronology due to the fact that the ranges do not overlap. They use all 3 species for cross-checking. If I am incorrect in this interpretation then kindly show me your evidence that despite no overlap of ranges they were able to use any one of these species to cross-check the full Bristlecone Pine chronology.

This is you misunderstanding again. You can do cross checking with any species using specimens of the same age. The reason the two species of Bristlecone pine are used is because the specimens are available for building the chronology back 8,000 years. This is no different than cross checking growth rings with historical dates -- cross-checking is used to confirm the chronology, not to build it.

Note only are the two species isolated, but groves of each of these trees are isolated from others ... because they grow on mountain peaks.

http://www.fs.fed.us/...ase/feis/plants/tree/pinari/all.html (again)

quote:
... The U.S. Geological Survey provides distributional maps of Rocky Mountain bristlecone and Great Basin bristlecone pines. ...

Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine Pinus aristata -- http://esp.cr.usgs.gov/data/little/pinuaris.pdf
Great Basin bristlecone pine Pinus longaeva -- http://esp.cr.usgs.gov/data/little/pinulong.pdf
Foxtail pine bristlecone pine -- http://esp.cr.usgs.gov/data/little/pinubalf.pdf

I have explained how stress bands are not applicable to the White Mountain BCP trees if we refer to your quotes on how stress bands are formed. Its possible that certain other species in similar areas would also undergo multiple rings, but not as consistently unless they exist in the same or nearby stands as those ancient BCP trees. This would explain the matching patterns when the BCP chronology is cross-checked with other species.

No you have not explained, because you have provided absolutely no evidence for stress bands actually being counted in error -- this is just something you made up to tell yourself and reduce your cognitive dissonance.

It would help your argument if you could show recent (eg 1816) cross-matching between these dry area regions and the European wetter region chronologies. This would help to prove your case that even the BCP trees have annual rings. Cross matching between BCP trees and European trees during the dry periods of the early or mid Holocene but not recently only serves to strengthen my point.

Tree ring dates matched exactly (100%) with historical dates for Bristlecone pine and Irish oak for 1816 CE, 536 CE and 42 BCE, Bristlecone pine, Irish oak, German oak and pine dendrochronologies match with error less than 0.5%. ...

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : 42 not 44

Edited by RAZD, : , i


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 4:09 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by mindspawn, posted 11-28-2013 5:32 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 62 of 119 (712138)
11-27-2013 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by mindspawn
11-27-2013 5:51 AM


Re: Some annual rainfall weather information for your consideration
Fair enough I cannot prove this lack of consistency. Are you able to prove that recent BCP tree ring sequences match with trees in areas known for wetter climates and soils (eg European tree ring chronologies). To prove this is essential for your whole argument.

"prove" is a word that doesn't really apply to science, concepts can be invalidated/disproven, but there is alway a possibility that new information will invalidate current concepts. What we can have is a high degree of confidence that the current concepts approximate reality to a high degree, and that further study will improve the accuracy of the concepts rather than completely destroy them. 99.5% accuracy is an example of high confidence -- ie that the real value is somewhere +/-0.5% of the value determined by dendrochronology.

But I have shown you the documentation (IntCal04) that discusses this accuracy:

Reimer, P. J., Baillie, M.G.L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W., Bertrand, C. J. H., Blackwell, P. G., Buck, C. E., Burr, G. S., Cutler, K. B., Damon, P. E., Edwards, R. L., Fairbanks, R. G., Friedrich, M., Guilderson, T. P., Hogg, A. G., Hughen, K. A., Kromer, B., McCormac, G., Manning, S., Ramsey, C. B., Reimer, R. W., Remmele, S., Southon, J. R., Stuiver, M., INTCAL04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 0-26 CAL KYR BP, Radiocarbon, Vol 46, Nr 3, 2004, p 1029–1058 https://digitalcommons.library.arizona.edu/objectviewer?o...

In an earlier post you stated the following:
"Curiously, the fact remains that the Irish Oak and the German Oak and Pine chronologies are not in precipitation sensitive environments, they are indeed annual rings, and they agree with the Bristlecone Pine chronology for over 8,000 years with 99.5% agreement."

But in a later post you quote the following:
"The relation between North American and European wood has been studied using bristlecone pine (BCP) and European oak (German oak and Irish oak), respectively. Discrepancies have become evident over the years, in particular when the German oak was corrected by a dendro-shift of 41 yr towards older ages (Kromer et al. 1996). Attempts were made to resolve the discrepancies by remeasuring BCP samples, measured earlier in Tucson (Linick et al. 1986). The University of Arizona Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research provided dendrochronologically dated bristlecone pine samples to Heidelberg (wood from around 4700 and 7600 cal BP), Groningen (around 7500 cal BP), Pretoria (around 4900 cal BP), and Seattle (around 7600 cal BP). The replicate measurements have a mean offset of 37 +/- 6 14C yr (n = 21) from the Tucson measurements."

That second paragraph is a direct quote from the paper just cited.

(99.5% agreement?)

Yes -- when we include the Bristlecone pine we have a discrepancy of 37 years at 7600 BP ...

... 37/7600 = 0.004868421 = 0.4868421% error => 100%-0.48% = 99.52% not erroneous, 99.52% accurate.

Of course you would say that. But everyone knows that trees would actually stop growing in summer during extended dry spells in extreme dry soil conditions, wood needs moisture to grow. Any denial of this is a head-in-the-sand approach to truth.

No, everyone knows that trees would slow down during droughts. Trees have reserves to call on in extreme conditions, and those that live where extreme conditions commonly occur are better adapted to surviving those conditions.

And once again you are basing your perception on false assumptions. The Bristlecone pines grow near the tree line, higher than other species of trees, and they preferentially grow on outcrops of dolomite, because dolomite retains more moisture than the surrounding sandstone. Dolomite is rock not soil, it soaks up water when it is available (such as after spring thaw) and the trees are able to tap those reservoirs of water.

The growing season is only 6 to 12 weeks, and that is just not enough time for the dolomite to completely dry out in 11 or 12 events ... that's at most a week between events ...

And the amount of precipitation that falls as rain is less than 1/2 of 10" to 12" ... at most it is 1/2" ... hardly enough to cause massive growth of several rings ... because new cells don't form that fast.

The math is against you.

I dealt with your stress ring assumption in the previous post. These are not stress rings and do not conform to your description of stress rings. An absolute stop to a wet season would not cause a stress ring, it would cause an end to a ring. Renewed rainfall would create another ring. These would in no way form multiple stress rings but would mimic wet and dry seasonal rings.

So now you are trying to redefine stress rings, and assume that you know more about tree growth than the scientists that have actually studied it ... another sign of cognitive dissonance, trying to change the evidence to fit your belief.

Again, the dolomite acts as a reservoir and the rain only restocks the reservoir. The cells and needles in the trees act as reservoirs.

I accept your point about dolomite, but this merely allows the tree to live where others cannot live by extending its source of water. Other trees would die, this does not disprove the temporary suspension of growth the tree would undergo during extensive dry spells. I already pointed out that these trees do actually undergo multiple rings in experimental situations under mimicked conditions.

(1) Where did you point this out?
(2) What is the source of this information?
(3) How did they determine that multiple rings formed? By identifying stress rings?

I am not wrong about the soil or the weather, I am mainly in agreement with you about the weather so if I am wrong then so are you. I believe your one quote slightly underestimates the actual rainfall figures in the arid region east of the sierra mountains when compared to actual figures as recorded in nearby weather stations. I also believe your quote overestimates the proportion of snow to rainfall, but the same situation would apply even with your rainfall figures. There would still be a few summer rainfalls of over an inch interspersed with absolutely dry soils , and therefore multiple growth rings per year.

So you agree that rainfall of 1/2" with rarer rains of 1" would occur on weekly intervals ...

All your weather stations are to the west side of the mountains where the Bristlecone pines grow -- the WET side where the rain falls on the mountain as the air is forced up to altitudes that cause the rain to fall. The air is dry because of the altitude ... so the west side of the mountain purges the air of moisture, and what comes over the top is drier a lot drier. Therefore using west side weather is false information.

The trees grow on dolomite and not "absolutely dry soil" ...

And you still only have 6 to 12 weeks to form 11 to 12 layers of cells of decreasing size and then new ones -- growth more than has been measured to occur in a year.

Regarding the dryness of the area here are some quotes:
"Stands of high elevation white pines are typically found on exposed, dry, and rocky slopes, ridges, and mountain peaks. They are well adapted to survive in the inhospitable environmental conditions that exist in these locations including intense cold, drought, wind, and blowing snow and ice."
"The White Mountains are also one of the driest mountain ranges in the world for its height"
"Explore the mysterious White Mountains of the California-Nevada border. ... and the third highest peak in California, is one of the driest regions on Earth."
"The dry climate and high altitude make this region a rare environment"
"Bristlecone pine displays its characteristic gnarled, twisted form as it rises above the arid, dolomite-rich slopes of the White Mountains "

Note that they do not say dry soil.

Note that they do not say 11 to 12 droughts per year.

Note that they do say that the Bristlecone pines are "well adapted" to survive the conditions.

Note the reference to dolomite.

We seem to be agreeing that the two chronologies match. So I am failing to see why I am trying to resolve dissonance when I agree the two chronologies match. This is central to my argument and it is also central to yours. I am only disputing a RECENT match between the two chronologies due to my claim that current conditions favor multiple rings in the White Mountains but NOT in Europe. Previously both regions were dry, they would match.

And curiously, the "RECENT match" would include the precise and 100% accurate matches with historical events (volcano eruptions) at 1816 CE, 536 CE and 42 BCE. Note that I expect that other matches will be found for other eruptions (they are noted in the papers as correlations between tree rings and ice core layers) if historical references can be found. Perhaps Egyptian or Chinese docuements.

The problem you have is now trying to force conditions in Ireland and Germany to match the climate patterns in the Bristlecone pines, but at different ages by inventing a new concept ... your false ring concept for the Bristlecone pine does not apply to the oaks -- as you concede -- and you are grasping at straws rather than confront the evidence that this shows your concept of multiple rings in the Bristlecone pine is false.

Nevertheless I cannot find your link that proves the two chronologies match by 99.5%, could you kindly post the link again so that I can review your evidence.

see Reimer et al, IntCal04 above

In a cold dry environment but with only intermittent summer rainfalls, the nature of trees is that they do stop growing between rainfalls. The weather during the early holocene was often cold and dry with limited summer rainfall, perfect for multiple rings. Dendrochronologists have not taken this into account, but trees have no other way to grow, except these rare summer rainfalls. In between they would stop growing, so even in Europe there would have to have been multiple rings.

(I am going to enjoy your response to this because I am right, evolutionists will froth at the mouth and ask for evidence and deny the truth, and the neutral readers will note that I have to be correct).

And dendrochronologists and botanists who have studied actual tree growth and actual response to actual stress conditions will be laughing at you and your hubris.

And of course scientists will ask for the evidence -- that is how science works.

And truly neutral readers will note the lack of evidence to support your position, the denial of evidence that counters your position, the massive amounts of evidence that support annual rings and an old earth ... they will not be blinded by your belief.

I am relying on your assertions that the two chronologies match, and also noting that both regions had dry cold periods with low summer rainfalls, perfect conditions for multiple rings interspersed by matching worldwide events.

Curiously we know about the Holocene weather patterns from the tree rings not in spite of them. You have also failed to show that mysterious magical stress rings that perfectly mimic annual rings would apply to those events ...

I never mentioned drought and so am wondering why you mentioned it? The following weather conditions would largely mimic the current White Mountain weather:
http://hol.sagepub.com/content/16/2/153.abstract
"We show (i) that winters were drier and summers shorter and cooler in western Europe during colder periods in Greenland, (ii) in contrast to the present-day climate in the Holzmaar region, summer rains were clearly reduced during the early Holocene, and (iii) the climate not only changed rapidly (< 5 years) but recurring drier events were common during the studied period."

Without drought your mysterious magical annual ring mimicking stress rings -- the mechanism you invented for the Bristlecone pine to make it fit your belief -- would not happen for the oaks. Or are you making up another mechanism ... in effect saying that the evidence is a lie but was made that way to fool people ...

From email received:

quote:
Your request for the following item has been passed on for action:

Jones, R. T., Marshall, J. D., Fisher, E., Hatton, J., Patrick, C., Anderson, K., Lang, B., Bedford, A. and Oldfield, F. (2011) Controls on lake level in the early to mid Holocene, Hawes Water, Lancashire, UK. The Holocene, 21 (7). pp. 1061-1072. ISSN 0959-6836 DOI 10.1177/0959683611400455


I fully expect to find that what you assume to have occurred is not what the paper actually says.

Could you kindly prove that the earlier trees in the German chronology were also experiencing flood plain conditions? If so how well drained was the soil between floods? If not then what was the weather like during the earlier period?

All you need to do is look at the maps in the papers to see where they are.

I posted this earlier in this thread, the following describes how tree rings are precipitation and temperature sensitive and this is compounded by dry soils:
http://web.utk.edu/~grissino/principles.htm
"As used in dendrochronology, this principle states that rates of plant processes are constrained by the primary environmental variable(s) that is most limiting. For example, precipitation is often the most limiting factor to plant growth in arid and semiarid areas. In these regions, tree growth cannot proceed faster than that allowed by the amount of precipitation, causing the width of the rings (i.e., the volume of wood produced) to be a function of precipitation. In some locations (for example, in higher latitudes and elevations), temperature is often the most limiting factor. For many forest trees, especially those growing in temperate and/or closed canopy conditions, climatic factors may not be most limiting. Instead, processes related to stand dynamics (especially competition for nutrients and light) may be most limiting to tree growth. In addition, the factor that is most limiting is often acted upon by other non-climatic factors. While precipitation may be limiting in semiarid regions, the effects of the low precipitation amounts may be compounded by well-drained (e.g. sandy) soils."

In other words there is a lot of variation in species and sites, and that the choices of species and sites to use depends on what you are looking for, be it climate or age measurements.

and my response on the Peanut Gallery was:

quote:
Peanut Gallery for Great debate: radiocarbon dating, Mindspawn and Coyote/RAZD Message 2: in Message 3 mindspawn claims:

My main problem with carbon dating is its calibration against tree ring chronology, which I feel is unreliable due to assumptions about the annual nature of rings. Tree growth is normally relative to moisture, and moisture cycles are not always annual:

We see in the above quote that variation in precipitation is often the main cause of variation in tree growth. In areas with only rare rainfall and well drained soils, there is no reason to assume the rings would be annual. The rings in arid areas are precipitation sensitive, and this is compounded by well drained soils. So if a region receives sporadic rainfall, and this water completely drains out the soil until the next rainfall, this would cause rings that are not annual, but are sensitive to every significant rainfall. The growth occurs while the soil is wet, and stops when the soil drains out.

Curiously, the comments by Dr. Henri D. Grissino-Mayer quoted refer to why growth rings have varying widths:

quote:
The Principle of Limiting Factors

As used in dendrochronology, this principle states that rates of plant processes are constrained by the primary environmental variable(s) that is most limiting. ...


The variation in ring width is a separate issue from the occurrence of growth rings in ecologies with very distinct annual changes, such as winter and summer on top of the Sierra Nevada mountains, or where deciduous trees have leaves that die in an annual cycle, such as the Oaks in Ireland and Germany.

This, of course, is also why certain species and growth areas are selected over others when a dendrochronology system is determined for providing age data.

In addition Mindspawn fails to go on and quote Dr. Henri D. Grissino-Mayer on how the problems he points out are dealt with in making a good dendrochronology.

http://web.utk.edu/~grissino/principles.htm#3

quote:
The Principle of Aggregate Tree Growth

This principle states that any individual tree-growth series can be "decomposed" into an aggregate of environmental factors, both human and natural, that affected the patterns of tree growth over time. For example, tree-ring growth (R) in any one year (indicated by a small "t", where t could be "1" for year 1, and "2" for year 2, etc.) is a function of an aggregate of factors:

1. the age related growth trend (A) due to normal physiological aging processes
2. the climate (C) that occurred during that year
3. the occurrence of disturbance factors within the forest stand (for example, a blow down of trees), indicated by D1,
4. the occurrence of disturbance factors from outside the forest stand (for example, an insect outbreak that defoliates the trees, causing growth reduction), indicated by D2, and
5. random (error) processes (E) not accounted for by these other processes

The Principle of Site Selection

... This principle states that sites useful to dendrochronology can be identified and selected based on criteria that will produce tree-ring series sensitive to the environmental variable being examined. ...


There is more on how cross-dating, replication and other methods are used to generate a good dendrochronology.

The conditions cited for poor growth ring data do not apply, for instance, to the Bristle-cone Pine high in the Sierra Nevada mountains, nor to the deciduous Oak trees in Ireland and Germany.

The problem for mindspawn is that he doesn't have to just question the accuracy, but he needs to show that the dendrochronologies are in fact inaccurate.

Given that the Bristle-cone Pine dendrochronology from Sierra Nevada, the Oak dendrochronology from Ireland, and the Oak dendrochronology from Germany agree within 0,5% over 8,000 years of record, what mindspawn needs to demonstrate what specific type of events could affect each dendrochronology in exactly the same way in spite of them being in 3 diverse locations in the world and two different types of trees (one pine -evergreen- and the other oak -deciduous), and two significantly different ecologies.

It is the correlations that show that the chronologies are accurate.


Other pages on his wonderful website talk about cross-dating and how chronologies are checked for accuracy.

If you read the rest of the information you will notice a familiar image ...

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : 42 not 44


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 5:51 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by mindspawn, posted 11-28-2013 8:27 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 63 of 119 (712144)
11-27-2013 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by mindspawn
11-27-2013 7:09 AM


happy thanksgiving
happy thanksgiving mindspawn. hope you have a happy family gathering. I'll finish this later.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 7:09 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by mindspawn, posted 11-28-2013 1:37 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 68 of 119 (712187)
11-28-2013 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by mindspawn
11-27-2013 7:09 AM


Mysterious Magical Weather Stress Rings
No problem with this, like I have said before I agree that recent tree ring chronologies in Europe are based on annual rings, and are highly accurate and consilient with known world events. ...

Then you have a problem when you argue against the recent Bristlecone pine tree ring chronology, because it matches (cross-checks) with the Irish oak chronology.

... Weather patterns beyond 2000bp were often dryer in Europe and that is where the multiple rings become applicable.

A new assertion without evidence ... but how come those rings match the Bristlecone pine rings?

Archaeological finds are often dated using carbon dating, which like tree rings in Europe and also our knowledge of historical dates are all pretty accurate until about 2000 years ago. ...

Actually we can go further back than than.

There is King Hezekiah's tunnel for instance

http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/...80%93-7-hezekiahs-tunnel

quote:
... Analysis of the ancient writing; Carbon 14 dating of the plant life disrupted by the tunnel; uranium-thorium dating of the stalactites and stalagmites that grew after completion of the tunnel have all supported a date of around 700BC, the date given in the Bible for these events.

http://www.nature.com/...nal/v425/n6954/abs/nature01875.html

quote:
... no well-identified Biblical structure has been radiometrically dated until now. Here we report radiocarbon and U–Th dating of the Siloam Tunnel(3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10), proving its Iron Age II date; ...

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/hezekiah.html

quote:
... King Hezekiah reigned between 727 B.C. and 698 B.C., the tunnel should have been built about that time. ...
... Geologist Amos Frumkin and colleagues3 collected plants preserved in the waterproof layers of plaster lining the tunnel and determined the carbon-14 date. In addition, stalactites were collected and their ages determined through uranium-thorium dating. The plant was dated at 700-800 B.C., whereas a stalactite was dated to 400 B.C. (It would have been expected to have formed after the tunnel was built.)

The 14C plant dates (700-800 BCE) and U-Th stalactite dates (400 BCE) bracket the tunnel age at 400 BCE to 800 BCE, which also brackets the time of Hezekiah's rule. That's a fairly wide range for judging accuracy, but it certainly shows they are in the right ball-park and cannot be significantly off by factors of 11 or 12.

Then there is Egyptian history and dating of various finds

Ramsey, C.B., Dee, M.W., Rowland, J.M., Higham, T.F.G., Harris, S.A., Brock, F., Quiles, A., Wild, E.M., Marcus, E.S., Shortland, A.J., Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt, Science 18 June 2010: 328 (5985), 1554-1557. [DOI:10.1126/science.1189395] http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5985/1554.full

quote:
... Radiocarbon dating, which is a two-stage process involving isotope measurements and then calibration against similar measurements made on dendrochronologically dated wood, usually gives age ranges of 100 to 200 years for this period (95% probability range) and has previously been too imprecise to resolve these questions.

Here, we combine several classes of data to overcome these limitations in precision: measurements on archaeological samples that accurately reflect past fluctuations in radiocarbon activity, specific information on radiocarbon activity in the region of the Nile Valley, direct linkages between the dated samples and the historical chronology, and relative dating information from the historical chronology. Together, these enable us to match the patterns present in the radiocarbon dates with the details of the radiocarbon calibration record and, thus, to synchronize the scientific and historical dating methods. ...

... We have 128 dates from the NK, 43 from the MK, and 17 from the Old Kingdom (OK). The majority (~75%) of the measurements have calibrated age ranges that overlap with the conventional historical chronology, within the wide error limits that result from the calibration of individual dates.

The modeling of the data provides a chronology that extends from ~2650 to ~1100 B.C.E. ...


This figure shows the distribution of uncalibrated radiocarbon dates against the modeled age. For each measurement, we show the mean and ±1σ of the radiocarbon and modeled calendar dates: ... The calibration curve is shown as two black lines (±1σ ). ...

The results for the OK, although lower in resolution, also agree with the consensus chronology of Shaw (18) but have the resolution to contradict some suggested interpretations of the evidence, such as the astronomical hypothesis of Spence (24), which is substantially later, or the reevaluation of this hypothesis (25), which leads to a date that is earlier. The absence of astronomical observations in the papyrological record for the OK means that this data set provides one of the few absolute references for the positioning of this important period of Egyptian history (Fig. 1A).


The earliest date in Fig 2 is ~2660 BCE with 7 samples and an average raw 14C 'age' of 4120 to 4130 BP (before 1950), which can then be compared against the 14C 'age' on the dendrochronology correlation to find the comparable dendrochronology calendar age. The dendrochronology correlation is shown as two lines in Fig 2

The Shaw date (red bar in Fig 1A) is ~2660 BCE based on historical documentation.

Converting the raw 14C 'age' of 4125 BP to dendrochronologial calendar age gives a date range of ~2700 BCE (minus 1&sigma line intersept) to ~2620 BCE (plus 1&sigma line intersept) for an average dendro age of ~2660+/-40 BCE. Note that +/-40 years in over 4,000 years is an error of +/-1%. The error is partly due to the two stage process of using 14C data to convert to dendrochronological calendar age.

Note that this conversion does not depend on the calculation of 14C 'age' -- that is a purely mathematical conversion of the measured amounts of 14C and 12C in the samples, and then comparing those 14C/12C values to ones found in the tree rings to find the best match to the tree rings, but it does introduce an error due to the band of rings that match those levels.

So we have another historical calibration date of 2660 BCE with 99% consilience between history and tree ring chronologies.

... Earlier than that, the earth was often subjected to regular monsoon type weather and other weather patterns different to today's weather that could result in multiple rings per year.

For example, the Mid-Holocene had global monsoon weather:
https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/...s/04_ClmDyn_globalmonsoon.pdf

Another grasping at straws, and you are running out of room ... at 4125 BP for our earliest to date match between dendrochronology and history we are half way through the Bristlecone and Irish dendrochronology calendars ... with only ~1% error.

Do you realize that Monsoon is a season rather than a single storm event?

quote:
... Usually, the term monsoon is used to refer to the rainy phase of a seasonally-changing pattern, although technically there is also a dry phase. ...

So a season with lots of rain followed by a season of dry weather ... rather perfect for the formation on annual tree rings.

Curiously the Egyptian civil calendar was broken into 12 months of 30 days + 5 extra days at the end, beginning with the rise of Sirius, and the months were divided into three seasons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_calendar

quote:
... The Egyptian year was divided into the three seasons of akhet (Inundation), peret (Growth - Winter) and shemu (Harvest - Summer). ...

Inundation would be the flooding of the Nile and correspond to their Monsoon season, an annual event.

From your link:

quote:
Monsoons, defined broadly as regional climates characterized by a summer precipitation maximum and a winter precipitation minimum which are caused predominantly by thermally driven seasonal reversals of winds, are a major component of tropical and subtropical climates (Ramage 1971; Hastenrath 1994). We recognize six monsoon regions: Asia (the Indian and East Asian monsoons, e.g. Lau et al. 2000), northern Africa (e.g. Hastenrath 1994), North America (which affects the American Southwest, Central America and northern-most South America: Douglas et al. 1993; Tang and Reiter 1984; Adams and Comrie 1997; Higgins et al. 1997; Higgins and Shi 2000), South America (Zhou and Lau 1998), southern Africa (e.g. Hastenrath 1994) and northern Australia (e.g. Davidson et al. 1983). The maximum monsoon precipitation occurs predominantly in June through August over the Northern Hemisphere (NH) continents and in December through February over the Southern Hemisphere (SH) continents (Fig. 1). Each of these monsoon systems exhibits significant variations in strength on interseasonal to interdecadal time scales (Shukla 1987; Webster and Yang 1992; Torrence and Webster 1999; Kumar et al. 1999; Krishnamurthy and Goswami 2000), although understanding and prediction of this variability is still incomplete (Webster et al. 1998).

On reading this paper I don't see how it helps you. Typically during monsoon seasons there is no dearth of water for growth (Irish and German oaks for example). Perhaps you could explain how this makes many additional tree rings?

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : refs


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by mindspawn, posted 11-27-2013 7:09 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by mindspawn, posted 12-01-2013 1:45 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 720 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 69 of 119 (712189)
11-28-2013 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by mindspawn
11-28-2013 2:37 AM


Re: Uranium and Thorium
Maybe you are not aware of the Purdue studies on detected fluctuations in the decay rate of radioactive isotopes. This was partly discussed in the Flood geology forum and also in another thread in this forum.

Purdue University has found the following relationship between decay rates and the solar wind:
1) During a solar flare decay may slow down suddenly
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html
2) There is a July slowdown in decay
http://www.purdue.edu/...r-flares,-give-advance-warning.html
"This influence can wax and wane due to seasonal changes in the Earth's distance from the sun and also during solar flares, according to the hypothesis, which is supported with data published in a dozen research papers since it was proposed in 2006, said Ephraim Fischbach, a Purdue University professor of physics."
3) There is a midnight slowdown in decay
4) There are "periodicities" 11.2-1 years and 12.5 years-1

http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.0205
"This article presents an analysis of about 29,000 measurements of gamma radiation associated with the decay of radon in a sealed container at the Geological Survey of Israel (GSI) Laboratory in Jerusalem between 28 January 2007 and 10 May 2010. These measurements exhibit strong variations in time of year and time of day, which may be due in part to environmental influences. However, time-series analysis reveals a number of periodicities, including two at approximately 11.2 year−1 and 12.5 year−1. We have previously found these oscillations in nuclear-decay data acquired at the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) and at the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), and we have suggested that these oscillations are attributable to some form of solar radiation that has its origin in the deep solar interior. A curious property of the GSI data is that the annual oscillation is much stronger in daytime data than in nighttime data, but the opposite is true for all other oscillations. This may be a systematic effect but, if it is not, this property should help narrow the theoretical options for the mechanism responsible for decay-rate variability."

The fluctuations are slight, but clearly detectable. Decay slows down during any increased penetration of the solar wind as described in the 4 points above. Regarding midnight, the solar wind that continuously bombards the poles penetrates the magnetic field easiest at the midnight position. In July the magnetic field is tilted most strongly towards the sun (in the northern hemisphere) and there is therefore increased penetration through the magnetic field in the weak spot of the magnetic field above the north pole.

Conclusion:
1)If slight increases in solar penetration can cause a small drop in decay, there is a strong possibility that large decreases in solar penetration can cause large increases in decay.
2) A strong magnetic field would cause large decreases in solar penetration.
3) The discovery that the process lacks randomness therefore removes the application of the half-life formula, which in turns ruins the current exponential curve that is applied to radioactive dates (the exponential effect of the half-life formula no longer applies)

Four points:

  1. this does not affect α++ or β- decay, which are the decay events involved in radiometric dating,
  2. no half-lives were changed,
  3. those periodicities match the solar cycle production of gamma rays, and
  4. gamma (γ ) ray decay only changes the energy of an atom, not the isotope or the element ...

http://www.lbl.gov/abc/wallchart/chapters/03/3.html

quote:

In gamma decay, depicted in Fig. 3-6, a nucleus changes from a higher energy state to a lower energy state through the emission of electromagnetic radiation (photons). The number of protons (and neutrons) in the nucleus does not change in this process, so the parent and daughter atoms are the same chemical element. In the gamma decay of a nucleus, the emitted photon and recoiling nucleus each have a well-defined energy after the decay. The characteristic energy is divided between only two particles.

The element and isotope before is the same as the element and isotope after γ decay. In addition γ particles are photons, like light.

On the other hand we have this article pertaining to half-life consistency over a wide range of test conditions:

Emery, G.T., Perturbation of Nuclear Decay Rates, Annual Review of Nuclear Science Vol. 22: 165-202 (Volume publication date December 1972), DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ns.22.120172.001121 http://www.annualreviews.org/.../annurev.ns.22.120172.001121

quote:
One of the paradigms of nuclear science since the very early days of its study has been the general understanding that the half-life, or decay constant, of a radioactive substance is independent of extranuclear considerations. Early workers tried to change the decay constants of various members of the natural radioactive series by varying the temperature between 24 K and 1280 K, by applying pressure of up to 2000 atm, by taking sources down into mines and up to the Jungfraujoch, by applying magnetic fields of up to 83,000 Gauss, by whirling sources in centrifuges, and by many other ingenious techniques. Occasional positive results were usually understood, in time, as the result of changes in the counting geometry, or of the loss of volatile members of the natural decay chains. This work was reviewed by Meyer & Schweidler (1), Kohlrausch (2), and Bothe (3). Especially interesting for its precision is the experiment of Curie & Kamerlingh Onnes (4), who reported that lowering the temperature of a radium preparation to the boiling point of liquid hydrogen changed its activity, and thus its decay constant, by less than about 0.05%. Especially dramatic was an experiment of Rutherford & Petavel (5), who put a sample of radium emanation inside a steel-encased cordite bomb. Even though. temperatures of 2500°C and pressures of 1000 atm were estimated to have occurred during the explosion, no discontinuity in the activity of the sample was observed.

Note that 83,000 Gauss is 270,000 times stronger than the Earth's current magnetic field at the surface on the equator, on the order of magnitude of a high resolution research MRI, and 3-6 times the strength of a clinical MRI (Wikipedia).

In other words, yes I am aware of gamma ray decay variation, but there is no significant measurable effect on either α++ or β- decay, or any effect on the half-lives involved in radiometric dating.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : fin

Edited by Admin, : Fix link.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by mindspawn, posted 11-28-2013 2:37 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by mindspawn, posted 12-01-2013 4:12 AM RAZD has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022