Great debate: radiocarbon dating, Mindspawn and Coyote/RAZD

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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 -- Geosciences and Environmental Change Science Center | U.S. Geological Survey
Great Basin bristlecone pine Pinus longaeva -- Geosciences and Environmental Change Science Center | U.S. Geological Survey
Foxtail pine bristlecone pine -- Geosciences and Environmental Change Science Center | U.S. Geological Survey 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. 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%. ...EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : 42 not 44Edited by RAZD, : , i

"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 University of Arizona Libraries That second paragraph is a direct quote from the paper just cited. 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. 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. 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. (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? 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. 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. 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. see Reimer et al, IntCal04 above 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. 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 ... 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. All you need to do is look at the maps in the papers to see where they are. 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 ...EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : 42 not 44

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

Thank you very much for your kind wishes. Hope you have a happy thanksgiving. I am from Africa and so don't celebrate thanksgiving but I do appreciate the thought.And thanks for the civility of the discussion so far, the discussion may seem haphazard and repetitive but I do believe we are making progress, even if merely to define where our differences lie.

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
The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements
2) There is a July slowdown in decay
New system could predict solar flares, give advance warning - Purdue University
"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)Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

I'm starting with your last comment first, kindly supply your proof that 1816 is recorded in those long lasting Bristlecone Pine trees of the White Mountains. This is my third request and would really strengthen your case if you could back up this statement with facts. The slopes are dry, and even dolomite drains, it merely retains the moisture longer than other soils. The presence of dolomite does not create an indefinite supply of moisture, it merely allows those trees to live, without the dolomite they would die in those conditions.Please supply your evidence for your comment "only in winter when the water freezes does this supply stop". Providing evidence for this comment will assist your point and so I'm looking forward to your evidence. I assumed you actually looked at the rainfall chart that I supplied for the White mountains, there are dry spells of a few weeks between wet spells.Please supply your evidence that the growing season is always limited to 6 to 8 weeks and if this growth is limited to the warm summer months, this ruins your argument that the growth is only from the annual spring melt. This summer growth argument actually suits me, because then growth is limited to the intermittent summer rainfalls which I have been claiming. When I looked into this growth season, it appears to be over 3 months, only sometimes being limited to 6 weeks.Any number of multiple rings ruins your argument, there does not always have to be 10-12 rings a year. This is your claim, a debate is not won through unsubstantiated claims. You need to present evidence as to how these trees store water and for how long they grow when the water supply is eliminated. We will see who has the cognitive dissonance as this debate continues, and I do think that evolutionary theory has been prematurely accepted as fact and so there is some intellectual pride and sometimes careers at stake if it is refuted. This does not amount to conspiracy theory though, merely human pride. Your comment has circular reasoning. The diagram is convincing, all we need now is for you to demonstrate that the reality is as convincing as the pretty picture. Can you demonstrate this? I am not following your point here. I do not believe there are any stress bands, so I am not claiming they are counted in error.My summary so far regarding Bristlecone pines:1) You still have provided no evidence for recent matching of BCPs with trees of definite annual growth patterns (eg 1816)
2) Even Dolomite soils drain in an extreme dry environment, no soil can hold water indefinitely, you need to prove how long dolomite retains moisture in a dry environment after about one inch of rainfall.
3) Your summer growing season claim contradicts your claim of a spring growing season.
4) I don't need 10-12 annual rings to refute your argument, a few summer rainfalls separated by dry spells of a few weeks also suits my argument.
5) You need to present evidence that trees continue to grow for many weeks after rainfalls, how and for how long do they retain moisture?
6) I still maintain that a tree would stop growing after a few weeks of no rainfall in extreme dry conditions even in dolomite soils, and feel you need to answer some of the above questions to refute this claim. This is how wood grows, with extreme moisture sensitivity.
7) I mentioned the Lammerts study in post 27 and post 36, where Bristlecone Pines have been shown to show multiple growth rings in in induced two week drought conditions.
http://www.sedin.org/crs_samp/26_1a.htm
You have not responded to the Lammerts study.

So I wade through a 30 page document to try and find some proof that recent BCP chronology matches European chronology and all I find is references to 4700bp, 7600bp, 4900 bp and these had enough error not even to be used in their IntCal04 study. Could you kindly point to somewhere in that study or anywhere else that makes your point that recent White Mountain BCP tree rings cannot have multiple rings because they are cross dated with European trees? Its a simple request of mine for you to show evidence for your claims.University of Arizona Libraries
"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." Yes, the agreement is in the earlier Holocene, this suits my argument as well. I need you to show me that BCP trees do not currently have multiple rings. There are only two weather stations on the dryer east side of the Sierra mountains in close proximity to the White Mountains:
Not Found
Not FoundEven further east in the dry Nevada, the rainfall pattern is the same, intermittent summer rainfalls interspersed with dry spells:
Tonopah Climate, Weather By Month, Average Temperature (Nevada, United States) - Weather SparkDo you deny that the White Mountains have intermittent summer rainfalls separated by dry spells of a few weeks? Please provide your evidence that cells and needles act as reservoirs and cause continuous growth throughout dry summer conditions. Please also provide evidence that dolomite retains moisture over weeks even after only an inch of rain on some of the driest slopes on earth.As for stress rings, I used your definition of stress rings, and your definition does not apply to the Bristlecone Pine situation which lacks any moisture between precipitation. In post 27 and 36. The source is from creationist studies. They identified these rings by counting rings. I agree the trees are well adapted, dolomite does not make your point. Just because the soils can retain moisture better than other soils, does not mean they will always be damp in one of the driest places on earth. I can see you are milking the dolomite point, but I have faced that fact and still find your logic short of making your point. RAZD I need you to just provide your evidence. Your repeated claims that 1816 shows in Bristlecone chronologies is starting to sound hollow without your evidence. The link you provide referred to ancient BCP chronolgies which confirms my point. I need more links from you to show that 1816 shows up in any White Mountain Bristlecone chronologies. My belief that incredibly dry slopes during two week drought conditions would cause a temporary suspension in wood growth? You need stronger support than dolomite soils to contradict the obvious about the nature of wood growth. Like I said , the multiple rings have been proven in experiments. I was referring to history, you seem to be referring to modern maps. Can you show me a middle Holocene map that shows that these were flood plain trees back then? The agreement over long periods supports my position too. I have never denied long term agreement on the various tree chronologies. You have to show that there is recent agreement with the BCP chronology as well to make your point.Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

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. A new assertion without evidence ... but how come those rings match the Bristlecone pine rings? Actually we can go further back than than.There is King Hezekiah's tunnel for instanceForbidden

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.

---

Radiometric dating of the Siloam Tunnel, Jerusalem | Nature

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 findsRamsey, 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] Just a moment...

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 2The 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. 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 seasonsEgyptian calendar - Wikipedia

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

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 ...

Gamma Decay

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 Just a moment...

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 2500C 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.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : finEdited by Admin, : Fix link.

Yes, they compared the dendrochronologies for IntCal98 in 1998, at which time there was agreement between the Bristlecone pine chronology and the German oak chronology:

quote:

---

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).

---

You can read the IntCal98 paper at Full PDF download hereBecause of the 41 year discrepancy with the Irish oak chronology they didn't use the Irish oak chronology in 1998. Then the German oak chronology was corrected for the effect of cockchafer beetles and they had a better match with the Irish oak chronology than the Bristlecone pine chronology, and so they dropped the Bristlecone pine chronology as the outlier. Note the part I have emphasized in boldThey spot checked four dates on the Bristlecone pine and found a 37 year discrepancy that would be resolved to match the wiggle pattern of the oak chronologies by shifting it to be 37 years older (ie -- it is missing 37 years compared to the others).Matching the wiggle pattern means all the ups and downs in between the spot checked dates matched -- not just those three dates. And curiously, the Bristlecone pine is apparently missing 37 years, and the match seen "would not occur if there were an error in the dendrochronology of either series."You just can't have many multiple rings currently and still match the oak chronologies -- it just is not mathematically possible. Curiously I went to weatherspark and put in "white mountains california" So I get quite a different result from you, one more in keeping with the actual reports of actual conditions regarding the environment where the Bristlecone pines grow. Once again there are these relevant points:

• the growing is 6 to 12 weeks,
• precipitation at the actual Bristlecone pine sites is 10" to 12" per year, mostly as snow, (more than half is snow rather than rain),
• the Bristlecone pines grow on outcrops of dolomite, which retains more moisture than the surrounding sandstone.
• dividing the growing season of 12 weeks by 11 to 12 incidents means one week between events MAX.
• that is not enough time for the dolomite to dry out, so the pines will still have water.
• dividing half the precipitation of 12" by 11 to 12 incidents means less than 1/2" per incident.
• that is not enough to cause a whole pseudo ring to form.

The math and the ecology are against your argument. Standard botany.Home | The Canopy Database Project

quote:

---

Diurnal and seasonal tree water storage was studied in three large Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii [Mirb.] Franco) trees at the Wind River Canopy Crane Research site. ...

---

http://www.unm.edu/~pockman/pubs/storage.pdf

quote:

---

... The contribution of stem water storage to these species’ water use during water stress was determined by time-series analysis of dehydration and rehydration of excised leaf-bearing branches of these trees. ...

---

Again this is basic behavior of the physics involved -- as the water is used it becomes available in decreasing amounts along an exponential curve, similar to a half-life curve, reduced but not depleted. Then they would show the pattern of stress rings not annual rings. Message 27 Do you mean this? No multiple tree rings documented there. But it does use U-Th dating ... Message 36 Do you mean this? It too does not discuss multiple ring growth, rather they discuss wider rings than normal, and find that the trees are most limited by temperature near the tree-line so that global climate change (warming) has promoted more growth near the tree-line, but little effect below that.

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.

---

So much for being water limited ... so much for 11 to 12 mysterious magical stress rings ... because the precipitation sensitivity relates to the width of the rings not the number of rings. When the abstract says

quote:

---

... Great Basin bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva) at 3 sites in western North America near the upper elevation limit of tree growth showed ring growth in the second half of the 20th century that was greater than during any other 50-year period in the last 3,700 years. The accelerated growth is suggestive of an environmental change unprecedented in millennia. ...

---

What they are talking about is ring width not the number of rings. If you got this from a creationist site then they were likely misrepresenting the information ... and then you failed to actually read the paper? And yet it is not an off/on proposition, but one of diminishing returns along an exponential curve, there would in effect be a "half-life" to the water content of the dolomite. I keep repeating this point because it is what allows the Bristlecone pines to suck water out of their environment, and this is the reason that the high elevation trees are actually temperature sensitive instead. And yet I have shown you that information. LaMarche studied the Bristlecone pines and found frost-rings -- rings of damaged cells -- at the 1816 layers (among others). Message 52 404 Not Found

quote:

---

He started comparing frost ring dates with other ancient events and was able to link the damaged rings to
events on the other side of the world.

​

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. Some Romans wondered whether the phenomenon was caused by the murder of Julius Caesar. 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." The cold, rainy
weather caused author Mary Shelley to stay inside on her Swiss holiday and write the beginnings of the book
"Frankenstein." There is a frost ring that year.

---

The frost rings were cause by early freezes in the trees that are temperature sensitive, living in elevations that only get above their minimum living temperatures for short periods each year. Archaeological Tree-Ring Dating at the Millennium - PDF

quote:

---

... . A classic example of replication at all levels occurred when LaMarche and Harlan (1973), of the University of Arizona, independently crossdated a bristlecone pine chronology from the White Mountains of California, which was then used to calibrate the radiocarbon time scale. ...

---

Same guy same trees same chronology ... Two weeks would only cause a slow down rather than complete cessation ... if you HAD two weeks ... And yet the reference for these purported experiments are apparently papers that have nothing to do with the number of tree rings as far as I can see -- do you have another reference ... or is this an example of selective memory and cognitive dissonance resolution?Now I can point you to an actual creationist article that does pretend to have multiple growth rings ... and also to the information that shows that the creationist paper is full of intentional misrepresentation, falsehoods, and innuendo designed to fool gullible people. Interested? Curiously the rivers are not that nimble in changing locations ... they would be in pretty much the same relative geography through the Holocene, including where the flood plains are (if anything they wander within the flood plain). All three dendrochronologies are absolute chronologies, meaning they are anchored by at least one tree of absolutely known dates (dates when sampled, dates when cut down, dates when germinated etc).They agree for over 7,600 years with a maximum error of 37 years (0.48% error), yet still match the wiggle patterns one to the other.They agree with each other and with history for 1816 CE, they agree with each other and with history for 536 CE, they agree with each other and with history for 42 BCE, and lately we see that the Bristlecone pine agrees with history for 2660 BCEIt is illogical to think that this correlation is due to anything but actual age.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : interimEdited by RAZD, : finEdited by RAZD, : linkEdited by RAZD, : linkEdited by RAZD, : 4,3Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.

This is my third reply -- see Message 522,040-year-old tree's rings read like global history

quote:

---

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

​

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.

---

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

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. ...

---

Archaeological Tree-Ring Dating at the Millennium - PDF

quote:

---

... . A classic example of replication at all levels occurred when LaMarche and Harlan (1973), of the University of Arizona, independently crossdated a bristlecone pine chronology from the White Mountains of California, which was then used to calibrate the radiocarbon time scale. ...

---

Same guy, same trees, same chronology ... and again it is a matter of diminishing returns instead of an on/off situation ... the water available becomes more difficult to extract so the availability is on an exponential curve, and, like radioactive decay, it would have a 'half-life' -- thus the supply would diminish but never stop. Until it freezes ... at the end of the 6 to 12 week growing season ... It's 6 to 12 weeks, just search my previous posts.Your rainfall charts do not apply -- look instead at the one I provided. Note average precipitation is ~0.5" ... Glad you think that -- some progress maybe.The problem you have is this:

1. the Bristlecone pine chronology is an absolute chronology, tied to a known date,
2. the Irish oak chronology is an absolute chronology, tied to a known date,
3. the German oak chronology is an absolute chronology, tied to a known date,
4. the Bristlecone pine matches the oak chronologies wiggle pattern with a shift of 37 years ... older.

Rather than too many rings it has too few. Gosh, you better get to work then. See Message 70: Different trees have different degrees of this ability, those that have lived in minimal water ecologies generally have better developed storage than those that live in lush conditions. Bristlecone pines have lived in this high altitude dry environment for several millenia and have adapted to it. The problem for you though, is not the strength of your belief (human pride?), but in the fact that you are exhibiting classic cognitive dissonance resolution patterns. This has nothing to do with scientists pursuing information and everything with personal dissonance resolution ... blaming the messengers is classic dissonance resolution behavior, and it allows you to feel 'safe' in your belief rather than have to confront the information provided. Can you really tell me that one living tree that is over 5,000 years old, and one dead but standing tree that is over 7,000 years old do not have thousands of overlapped years within an 8,000 year chronology? That these two trees alone count for most of the chronology to 7,600 BP when the error compared to the oak chronologies was found to be only 0.48%? Really? Multiple rings a year caused by environment rather than annual growth are by definition stress rings. Done and double done It is not an on/off proposition but one of diminishing returns. That slows growth rather than ends it. How so? In the spring the snow melts, the ground thaws, the dolomite takes up water, the trees start growing with large early growth cells. As the summer progresses the water in the dolomite decreases, even if occasionally replenished by light summer rains, and so the growth declines, cells get smaller. Then winter come, early at those high altitudes, the ground and the trees freeze and growth stops, completely, forming an end of year band. Glad to see you are moving away from that argument. But a few rainfalls/dry spells, even with dry spells of a few weeks would not cause a false annual ring. There would likely be variation in cell size, but cells do not grow in a day, the dolomite acts as a reservoir smoothing out the water supply.But your biggest problem is that the Bristlecone pine chronology is apparently missing 37 annual rings: rather than having an excess there are too few. Thus 37 extra rings would actually appear to make the chronology better. Done and double done. And actual studies show that it is not moisture but temperature that is the critical limiting factor for the trees near the tree line, that the trees are not limited by "extreme moisture sensitivity" ...Your opinion is your opinion and you are free to believe it, however opinion has been demonstrated to have remarkably little influence on reality. No citation and no reference at that time ... Again no citation and no reference at that time ...Do you really expect me to respond to a comment made without substantiation or reference to the source? Gosh it's Gish ... not Lammert ... and you expected me to find it by what ... divine intervention?Curiously, I may respond in greater detail in my next post for further review of this ... purported study ... but what I saw in a quick cursory reading was that there was a (typical?) 'slight-of-hand' quick misdirection for no rings in early growth and then suddenly 3 year old and 4 year old saplings having 3 and 4 rings ... seems more like he is trying to fool you than to do anything real (or honest). This would be very easy to replicate by an unscrupulous person ... you take the measurement for the saplings at or near the top and you will have no rings, then take the 3 and 4 year old saplings near the root and you will have all the rings recorded. Duane Gish is a known purveyor of falsehoods.Having a 3 year old sapling with 3 growth rings ... having a 4 year old sapling with 4 growth rings ... is not conclusive evidence of multiple ring growth (I can show you better).Enjoy

Thanks to you as well.We had new england fare -- lobster -- followed by pumpkin pie.I spent many years in Canada and so I celebrate two thanksgivings, one in October (instead of Columbus Invasion Day) and one in November. Then with Winter Solstice (21 Dec this year) that will be three major feasts in three months ... so New Year's will be a time for fasting. Well I see some progress, even if is is slow small baby steps. But yes, this is an opportunity to lay out our respective positions in great detail.Enjoy.

As I said before 6 to 12 weeks ... 3 months is 12 weeks.Currently I am obtaining additional information on the Bristlecone/dolomite environment, but I did run across this abstract:Wright, R.D., Some Ecological Studies on Bristlecone Pine in the White Mountains of California, 1963 PhD Thesis for University of California Plant Science Dept., Mooney, H.A., Advisor, Some Ecological Studies on Bristlecone Pine in the White Mountains of California | Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research

quote:

---

Bristlecone pine, Pinus aristata, was studied in the White Mountains of California. The climate is dry, with annual precipitation in the bristlecone zone averaging 12 to 13 inches. The trees are found in a zone from approximately 9,500 feet to 11,500 feet elevation. Three geologic substrates are widely exposed in the bristlecone zone: dolomitic limestone, sandstone and granite. Vegetation was sampled on these substrates, using line transects. Bristlecone pine is restricted principally to dolomite. ... Dolomite in the White Mountains is a nearly white rock, whereas sandstone and granite are dark. The white rock reflects more solar radiation than do the other substrates, and as a result the dolomite soil averages several degrees centigrade cooler than sandstone soil. This lower temperature acts as a moisture conserving mechanism on dolomite, delaying soil drought. Dolomite also has higher moisture capacity than sandstone and granite. ... Drought tolerance may be one factor contributing to maximum development of bristlecone pine on dolomite, and of sagebrush on sandstone and granite. Bristlecone pine reaches maximum development on north slopes, and sagebrush reaches maximum development on south slopes. This supports the conclusion that drought tolerance is a decisive factor in determining substrate-oriented distribution patterns. ... sagebrush, with its shallow root system, is less efficient in obtaining mineral nutrient requirements than is the deep rooted pine. Photosynthesis measurements demonstrated that bristlecone pine is tolerant of shading. ... Maximum elevation of bristlecone pine is the same on all substrates, and was found to be limited by air temperature during the growing season. ...

---

Wright, R.D., Mooney, H.A., Substrate-oriented Distribution of Bristlecone Pine in the White Mountains of California, American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 73, No. 2 (Apr., 1965), pp. 257-284 Published by: The University of Notre Dame JSTOR: Access CheckThis is a copy of fig 4 from the paper. This seems to show spring thaw snow-melt for the first three weeks, with a small dip to ~6.5% moisture content, a short reprieve (likely summer rain) and then decline again, all in a 5 week measurement period.Wilting occurs as a tree uses up its reserves. Not sure how pwp was calculated - but it appears to be a calculation based on soil tension and not a field study. That this pwp is not critical for the Bristlecone pine is shown by Fig 7: ... which shows declining but active photosynthesis and respiration down to ~4% to 5% moisture content, below the low point above, so it appears that the pwp is not correct (the pwp is at ~8.3% moisture content). This could be due to altitude affecting the water pressure, but the growth observed could also be due to having deep roots below 8" (Fig 4 is only the conditions at 8" deep), and the Bristlecone pine is a deep-rooted tree able to use water deeper in the soil.There is also some good climate records in this report:

quote:

---

TABLE 2.-Climatic summary for Crooked Creek Laboratory, 1953-1962 (Pace, 1963)

		Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
Ave Snowfall	in	14.5	21.5	12.6	14.8	16.8	2.8	0.7	0.0	1.6	6.6	9.6	11.4
Ave Snow H2O	in	1.36	2.00	1.09	1.21	1.48	0.22	0.07	0.0	0.15	0.53	0.93	0.98
Ave Rainfall	in	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.13	0.0	1.35	0.63	0.35	0.06	0.0	0.0
Ave H2O precip.	in	1.36	2.00	1.09	1.21	1.60	0,22	1.42	0.63	0.50	0.60	0.93	0.98

---

Note -- only August does not have snow I have read the document you linked, but it is not Lammert's study ... it is a review? summary? regurgitation? by Duane Gish (of Gish Gallop infamy), which is not a good start. I have also read some documentation on Lammert that casts a doubtful slant to his purported work from other creationists that disagreed with him on elements of geology that they are better versed in. Not a good start at all. The source you want is:Lammerts, W. E. 1983. Are the bristle-cone pine trees really so old? CRSQ 20:108-15.CRSQ is Creation Research Society Quarterly -- their pretend scientific journal.There doesn't appear to be an actual copy available, the best I could find wasThe page you were looking for doesn't exist (404)

quote:

---

ARE THE BRISTLE-CONE PINE TREES REALLY SO OLD?

​

WALTER E. LAMMERTS

​

Various treatments were given to 8-month-old bristle-cone pine seedlings; and it was found that supplementing the winter day length with a 250-watt heat lamp in order to give a total of 16 hours of illumination proved most effective. The lamp was placed about three feet above the seedlings, and the temperature in the growth chamber was kept at about 70'F. Those which received a short (circa 21 days) drought stress period in August of the third growing season showed up having one more growth ring than the control seedlings, that is four growth rings instead of three. Also seedlings which received a two week drought stress period in August of the fourth growing season showed a similar extra growth ring. The bearing of this on the estimates of the age of the bristle-cone pine forest is discussed. Under the San Francisco type of both spring and fall rainfall with a relatively dry perod in the summer the young forests on the White Mountains would have grown an extra ring per year quite often. Accordingly it is believed that the presumed 7100 year age postulated for these trees by Ferguson would be reduced to about 5600 years, on the assumption that extra rings would be formed by stress during about 50% of the years between the end of the Flood and about 1200 A.D.

---

Lammert is not a dendrochronologist and from what I have seen of his work he would likely willingly - blindly - interpret a stress ring as a growth ring, thus he is able to convince himself that he has created an extra growth ring instead of a stress ring.He also uses San Francisco weather instead of White Mountain weather ... an erroneous application that is based on stupidity, ignorance, delusion, insanity or malice. It certainly is not honest. At least you attempted to find the appropriate weather pattern ...Against this claim we have: Accuracy of tree ring dating of Bristlecone Pine for calibration of the radiocarbon time scale

quote:

---

Abstract

​

An independently developed tree ring chronology for bristlecone pine in the White Mountains, California, provides a basis for testing the accuracy of dendrochronological calibration of the radiocarbon time scale. Several lines of evidence show that the growth rings in this species are true annual rings. Internal evidence and cross-chronology comparison indicate that there is no error in calendar dates assigned to wood specimens for comparative radiocarbon analysis, at least back to 3535 B.C.

---

LaMarche and Harlan obtained samples in 1971 that were cross-matched with White Mountain Bristlecone Pines sampled in 1954 by Schulman. Most trees have formed exactly 18 rings in the period 1954—1971, a few formed only 17 rings, none formed more than 18 rings. This certainly indicates that the Bristlecone pines did not grow more than one ring per year.So that is very solid evidence that recent growth patterns do NOT involve extra rings, in fact it shows that missing rings are fairly common but detectable.

Tree Ring Accuracy and Precision

Tree rings and dendrochronology are one of the most accurate and precise annual measuring systems available to both scientist and the layperson: it is fairly easy to count rings in a cross-section or coring of a tree. Once the problems of false rings and missing rings are identified it becomes possible to identify these in the chronologies, and thus correct them for such errors. This is well documented in Message 41, Dendrochronology Basics.This has been tested by comparing the chronologies with actual historical events. There is 100% agreement with several historical events:

• in 1816 CE (the "year without a summer" following the volcanic eruption of the Tambora volcano in Indonesia in 1815), this shows up in the Bristlecone pine chronology as a frost ring and in the Irish oak chronology as a double winter band.^(1,2)
• in 536 CE sever weather shows up in historical documents, there is a frost ring in the Bristlecone pine chronology, abnormally little growth in Irish oak, and "sever narrow rings in Swedish pines" ^(3,4)
• in 44 BCE Sicily's Mount Etna exploded, spewing sulfurous gas into the sky, atmospheric phenomena continued in the years 43 and 42 BCE. The sun grew pale for months, crops withered in Europe, and this shows up in the Bristlecone pine chronology as a frost ring in 42 BCE.^(1,4,5)

In addition, as noted in Message 54, Irish Oaks, and Message 55, German Oak and Pines, artifacts from an Egyptian tomb had 14C levels measured and the results then compared those to the IntCal04 combined oak and pine chronology to determine the relative dendro/calendar age for those measured levels, resulting in a further match to historical documents at 2660 BCE with 99% accuracy and precision.⁽⁶⁾ This of course is the purpose for testing the 14C levels in the dendrochronologies and this will be discussed in greater detail later.Another measure of accuracy and precision is to compare several dendrochronologies against each other. As noted in Message 54, Irish Oaks, and Message 55, German Oak and Pine, such comparison was done: INTCAL04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 0-26 CAL KYR BP, PDF⁽⁷⁾

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), 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 2 parts of the German Preboreal Pine Chronology (PPC), which were formerly floating, have been linked and cross-matched dendrochronologically to the absolutely-dated Holocene oak chronology. Including additional new finds, the south German part of the PPC is prolonged into the Younger Dryas and now starts at 11,993 cal BP. New pine chronologies from Switzerland and eastern Germany extend the PPC to 12,410 cal BP (Friedrich et al., this issue).

​

The Heidelberg Data Set

​

14C measurements of the wood from the German pine chronology, the Lake Neufchatel chronology, and a new larch series provide terrestrial calibration extending back to 12,410 cal BP. In addition, intervals were measured to fill gaps in the tree-ring 14C record resulting from previous shifts or cockchafer-damaged sections that could not be re-instated (Friedrich et al., this issue). Additional decadal measurements of German oak have been made for the periods 2570—2800 cal BP and 3440—3640 cal BP. The oak samples were pretreated with acid-alkali-acid (de Vries method), whereas the pines underwent an additional soxhlet extraction to remove resins (Becker and Kromer 1986; Kromer et al. 1986).

​

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.

---

That's a lot of information but it all comes down to this:The Bristlecone Pine had been included in IntCal98, but is not included in the calibration data for IntCal04 because it is 37 years younger than the two oak chronologies at 4700 to 7600 BP (before 1950). This was determined by remeasuring 4 data points of the Bristlecone pine chronology and finding that there was an offset compared to the oak chronologies. When the chronology was shifted 37 years older then the 14C variation 'wiggle' pattern match those of the two oak chronologies.As noted in Message 52, Bristlecone pines, because the Bristlecone pines grow at such high elevations they have very short periods of growth when the temperature is only slightly above what they 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 - similar to what was found by LaMarche and Harlan in 1973 - that would make the chronology too young.This, however, results in an error of only 0.48% at 5650 BCE, which is still very high accuracy.This very strong consilience between all three dendrochronologies and with historical dates back to 2660 BCE demonstrates that they are annual ring chronologies with very high precision and accuracy and that this results in high confidence in the ages measured.There is also consilience with Carbon-14 level measurements. The calculation of 14C age and the calibration of the measurements will be discussed later, however here we can discuss the simple measurement of 14C: the amount measured in the tree rings in each of the chronologies matches from one chronology to the other for the years covered by the chronology -- with the caveat that the Bristlecone pine chronology is shifted 37 years older. Because 14C decays these measured amounts are decreasing with age, as expected, but the matches between the dendrochronologies would not be expected if there were errors in any one of them. And it doesn't matter what the decay rate of 14C is or whether it varies, samples from the same age will decay by the same amount to the same level today.The annual nature of the Bristlecone Pines were demonstrated by LaMarche and Harlan in 1973: Accuracy of tree ring dating of Bristlecone Pine for calibration of the radiocarbon time scale⁽⁸⁾

quote:

---

Abstract

​

An independently developed tree ring chronology for bristlecone pine in the White Mountains, California, provides a basis for testing the accuracy of dendrochronological calibration of the radiocarbon time scale. Several lines of evidence show that the growth rings in this species are true annual rings. Internal evidence and cross-chronology comparison indicate that there is no error in calendar dates assigned to wood specimens for comparative radiocarbon analysis, at least back to 3535 B.C.

---

LaMarche and Harlan obtained samples in 1971 that were cross-matched with White Mountain Bristlecone Pines sampled in 1954 by Schulman. Most trees have formed exactly 18 rings in the period 1954—1971, a few formed only 17 rings, none formed more than 18 rings. This certainly indicates that the Bristlecone pines did not grow more than one ring per year.They also compared a new Bristlecone pine chronology going, back to 3535 BCE, with the old one and found that they had two missing rings in 5503 counted rings, an error of <0.04%. They matched the chronologies to find the two dates that had missing rings - which were narrow annual rings on the old chronology - and when they inserted 0 width rings the two chronologies matched year for year with 100% accuracy and precision.So that is very solid evidence that recent growth patterns do NOT involve extra rings, in fact it shows that missing rings are fairly common but detectable.There are also correlations with ice cores that will be discussed later.And tree rings are only one of several annual counting methods for measuring age. ConclusionDendrochronology is a well developed discipline that has developed the methodology necessary to match different trees and different species and develop a highly accurate and precise continuous chronology. Three such chronologies agree with over 99.5% accuracy. The longest chronology extends back into the Younger Dryas (12,410 BP - before 1950 - or 10,460 BCE)Enjoy.

---

References

1. Phillips, D., 2,040-year-old tree's rings read like global history
   http://www.contracostatimes.com/...cctimes/news/15591268.htm
2. Martinez, L., Useful Tree Species for Tree-Ring Dating, Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, University of Arizona, Oct. 2001 update, [2013, November 24]: Useful Tree Species for Tree-Ring Dating
3. Wikipedia, Extreme weather events of 535—536, [2013, November 24]: Volcanic winter of 536 - Wikipedia
4. 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
5. Forsyth, P.Y., In the Wake of Etna, 44 B.C., Classical Antiquity, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Apr., 1988), pp. 49-57, Published by: University of California Press, Article Stable URL: JSTOR: Access Check
6. 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] Just a moment...
7. 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
8. LaMarche Jr, V.C. and Harlan, T.P., Accuracy of tree ring dating of Bristlecone Pine for calibration of the radiocarbon time scale, Journal of Geophysical Research vol 78 nr 36, 1973, p 8849—8858, Just a moment...

Edited by RAZD, : linksEdited by RAZD, : moreEdited by RAZD, : addedEdited by RAZD, : add fig 7Edited by RAZD, : added climateEdited by RAZD, : udated w new info

I think we have covered as much detail on tree rings as we need to at this point. We can come back to this when we discuss 14C measurements and decay and the calibration of original atmospheric 14C levels.It's time to move on to the next form of annual layer systems so that the consilience between them and the tree chronologies can answer a lot of your questions on the validity of the tree rings (if you still have any ... ).If I'm getting too far ahead of you let me know.

Lake and Marine Varve Basics

Rhythmites⁽¹⁾

quote:

---

A rhythmite consists of layers of sediment or sedimentary rock which are laid down with an obvious periodicity and regularity. They may be created by annual processes such as seasonally varying deposits reflecting variations in the runoff cycle, by shorter term processes such as tides, or by longer term processes such as periodic floods.

---

Varves⁽²⁾

quote:

---

A varve is an annual layer of sediment or sedimentary rock.

​

Of the many rhythmites found in the geological record, varves are one of the most important and illuminating to studies of past climate change. Varves are amongst the smallest-scale events recognised in stratigraphy.

​

Varves form in a variety of marine and lacustrine depositional environments from seasonal variation in clastic, biological, and chemical sedimentary processes.

​

The classic varve archetype is a light / dark coloured couplet deposited in a glacial lake. The light layer usually comprises a coarser laminaset of silt and fine sand deposited under higher energy conditions when meltwater introduces sediment load into the lake water. During winter months, when meltwater and associated suspended sediment input is reduced, and often when the lake surface freezes, fine clay-size sediment is deposited forming a dark coloured laminaset.

---

The difference between a rhythmite and a varve is that the rhythmite can have any periodicity, even be variable, but the varve is strictly an annual layering process. Varves can vary from barely distinguishable to dramatic contrast.One of the ways to ensure you have an annual varve system is to look for a cycle of life and death in organisms that are present in one half of the varve (growing season) but are absent in the other half of the varve (non-growing season). Seasonal markers like diatom shells and foraminifera shells have been used, forming a white layer in contrast to a dark sediment layer. Synchroneity of Tropical and High-Latitude Atlantic Temperatures over the Last Glacial Termination⁽³⁾ With a well marked layering system, such as is shown above, the layers can be counted, just like tree rings, to form a chronology.The geological principle of superposition applies: Principle of Superposition⁽⁴⁾

quote:

---

The law of superposition (or the principle of superposition) is a key axiom based on observations of natural history that is a foundational principle of sedimentary stratigraphy and so of other geology dependent natural sciences:

​

Sedimentary layers are deposited in a time sequence, with the oldest on the bottom and the youngest on the top.

---

Thus a core taken in a lake with varves will have new layers on top and old layers on the bottom. As with tree rings, individual cores can be cross-checked with others taken from different locations to account for false layers or missing layers. Cores can only be taken in sections due to physical limitations of equipment cores need to be taken in a manner to overlap ends of sections to ensure continuity of the data.Like tree rings there can be floating chronologies and absolute chronologies. If an artifact in a floating chronology can be absolutely dated, then the chronology can be anchored by the artifact age.Organic artifacts (leafs, twigs, insect bodies, etc) and inorganic artifacts (volcanic tuff, flood rubble, etc) can be deposited in the lake, and then be buried by later layers, so their location in the cores provides direct evidence of their age. Care needs to be taken in choosing core sites to avoid taking cores near inlets where false layers from storm runoff and the like would be common.Like tree rings there can be variation from year to year in the thickness of the varves, but unlike tree rings the older layers can become compressed by the weight of the other layers and become thin and harder to distinguish. This also means that absolute thickness at one depth cannot be simply compared to absolute thickness at a different depth to indicate climate changes, but the compression must be taken into account.Because these layers are annual they can have high precision and accuracy in the measured lengths of their chronologies, and errors should be similar to tree ring chronologies, producing high confidence in their results.One of the things that affects rhythmite and varve formation is particle size, and varves can have different layers with different size particles, some that settle faster than others: Settling Velocity and Suspension Velocity⁽⁵⁾

quote:

---

Every material has its own suspension and settling velocity. The suspension velocity is the speed of water above which the water will pick up the material and hold it in suspension. The settling velocity is the speed below which the material will be dropped out of suspension and will settle out of the water.

​

The relative sizes of gravel, sand, silt, and clay particles are shown below:

​

​

Sand and gravel are both large and dense. In addition, they have a small surface area per unit volume since they are roughly spherical. So these types of particles have a high suspension velocity.

---

13.6 Colloids⁽⁶⁾

quote:

---

When finely divided clay particles are dispersed throughout water, they do not remain suspended but eventually settle out of the water because of the gravitational pull. The dispersed clay particles are much larger than molecules and consist of many thousands or even millions of atoms.

---

Particle Size Analysis Lab⁽⁷⁾

quote:

---

The connection between particle size and settling rate is expressed by Stoke's Law. This relationship shows that small particles, those exposing high specific surface area (m2 g-1), produce more resistance to settling through the surrounding solution than large particles and, hence, settle at slower velocities

​

Stoke's Law :
V = (D^{^2}g(d₁-d₂)/(18n)

​

The formula shows that the settling velocity, V, is directly proportional to the square of the particle's effective diameter, D; the acceleration of gravity, g; and the difference between the density of the particle, d1, and density of the liquid, d2; but inversely proportional to the viscosity (resistance to flow) of the liquid, n. The density of water and its viscosity both change in a manner so that particles settle faster with increased temperature. Hence, it may be necessary to apply temperature correction factors as explained with the procedure.

​

Stoke's Law can be condensed to V=kD^{^2} by assuming constant values for all components except the effective diameter of soil particles. Then, for conditions at 30 degrees C, k=11241. For particles size values in centimeters, the formula yields settling velocity, V, in centimeters per second. Because soil particles do not meet the requirements of being smooth spheres, exact conformance to Stoke's Law is not realized.

---

Soil Colloids⁽⁸⁾

quote:

---

The colloidal state refers to a two-phase system in which one material in a very finely divided state is dispersed through second phase.

​

The examples are:

​

Solid in liquid - Clay in water (dispersion of clay in water)
Liquid in gas -Fog or clouds in atmosphere

​

The clay fraction of the soil contains particles less than 0.002 mm in size. Particles less than 0.001 mm size possess colloidal properties and are known as soil colloids.

---

If we use 0.002 mm (0.0002 cm) for clay in the above formula we getV = 11241(0.0002)^{^2} = 0.00044964 cm/s
= 1.62 cm/hr = 38.8 cm/day
= 15.3 in/day.As you can see the theoretical settling velocity of clay according to Stoke's Law would be very, very slowly. Actual times are longer due to the interaction of charged clay particles with water, and because the clay particles are not spherical, but it would take days if not weeks or months for new clay from rainstorms to settle to the bottom. This is especially true in the center of the lake as the new inflow must take time to mix with the lake water and get dispersed sufficiently to reach the center area. This means that a lake can act as a buffer to average out all the clay sediment being introduced to the lake by the inflow: even large variations in inflow will have little effect on the amount of clay settling to the bottom at the center of the lake.This means that clay layers in varves are strong indicators of annual events, as they have to occur over many months with no other depositions.Enjoy.

---

References

1. Wikipedia.com, Rhythmite, [2013, November 29]: Rhythmite - Wikipedia
2. Wikipedia.com, Varves, [2013, November 29]: Varve - Wikipedia
3. Lea, D.W., Pak, D.K., Peterson, L.C., Hughen, K.A., Synchroneity of Tropical and High-Latitude Atlantic Temperatures over the Last Glacial Termination , Science Vol 301, Nr 5638, p 1361-1364, 5 September 2003 http://http://www.sciencemag.org/content/301/5638/1361.full.pdf?sid=d12e9ca2-ab6a-4fd9-b7fc-d6bef7a88bc8
4. Wikipedia.com, Principle of Superposition, [2013, November 29]: Law of superposition - Wikipedia
5. Cooke, R., Settling Velocity and Suspension Velocity, Mountain Empire Community College. 2013 [2013, December 2] http://water.me.vccs.edu/concepts/velocitysusp.htm
6. Prenhall.com, 13.6 Colloids, Chemistry, Prentice Hall, Pearson Education 2002 [2013, December 2] http://wps.prenhall.com/...objects/3312/3391718/blb1306.html
7. Farrel, P., Particle Size Analysis Lab, Soil, Water, and Climate Dept, University of Minnesota, 2010-2013 [2013, December 2] UMD: 404 Page Not Found
8. AgriInfo.in, Soil Colloids, Introduction to Soil Science, AgriInfo.in 2011 [2013, December 2] Soil Colloids - agriinfo.in

Edited by RAZD, : added

The observations affect more than just the decay of radon according to the original Purdue claims:
The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements
"Ephraim Fischbach, a physics professor at Purdue, was looking into the rate of radioactive decay of SEVERAL isotopes as a possible source of random numbers generated without any human input""long-term observation of the decay rate of silicon-32 and radium-226 seemed to show a small seasonal variation. The decay rate was ever so slightly faster in winter than in summer"(silicon-32 decays by beta emission and radium-226 decays by alpha decay)New system could predict solar flares, give advance warning - Purdue University
" The Purdue experimental setup consists of a radioactive source - manganese 54 - and a gamma-radiation detector. As the manganese 54 decays, it turns into chromium 54, emitting a gamma ray, which is recorded by the detector to measure the decay rate."Manganese 54 decays via beta decay.In reply:
1) You are incorrect. If you had read all the articles you would have seen that alpha decay and beta decay were affected.
2) If you understand that the half-life exponential formula is based on the randomness of decay you would understand that the half-lives are completely affected by the discovery that the process of decay is not random.
3) Irrelevant, due to point 1 being incorrect. Incorrect. You are wrong as explained above. The decay exponential formula of a half-life is wholly dependent on randomness, which is assumption that there is no cause/effect that causes the decay event.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/...nuclear/halfli2.html
"radioactive decay is a statistical process which depends upon the instability of the particular radioisotope, but which for any given nucleus in a sample is completely unpredictable. The decay process and the observed half-life dependence of radioactivity can be predicted by assuming that individual nuclear decays are purely random events. If there are N radioactive nuclei at some time t, then the number ΔN which would decay in any given time interval Δt would be proportional to N:
where λ is a constant of proportionality (decay constant)."Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.