Carbon-14: A Scientifically Proven Dating Method?

Hi, General!Your introductory post contained far too many points for a focused discussion, but this approach often works itself out as respondents usually choose just a few points to respond to. Just as an example, you could have dedicated an entire thread simply to discussion of the ¹⁴C steady state issue.The substantive responses to your initial post addressed these issues:

• ¹⁴C calibration with tree rings, varves, glacial ice.
• The age of the marine carbon reservoir.
• Age of your citations.
• Misrepresentation of ¹⁴C calibration studies.

Your reply addressed none of these points, and the larger portion simply reiterated one of your points that no one chose to address, the ¹⁴C steady state issue. A discussion will have no back and forth if one side of the discussion ignores the points of the other.Lastly, and in case you didn't notice, I edited your initial post to make it readable. While formatting is of minimal importance in short posts, in longer multi-section posts with bullets, quotes and citations formatting is very important. Did you enter your post using Word? If so and you just used a cut-n-paste, that would explain the loss of spacing between paragraphs and all other formatting. Word can generate HTML, and you can use HTML in your posts.[Fixed "¹⁴C" appearance. --Admin][This message has been edited by Admin, 08-05-2003]

The General was discovered to be a plagiarist. I think he was typing in excerpts from books off his own shelf. Unfortunately, he finally posted a lengthy excerpt from a book that someone else had already posted on the Internet and got caught. It wasn't any mystery what he was doing, as his follow up posts differed greatly in style and quality from his initial posts. I offered him the opportunity to continue posting his columns, but only if I first reviewed them. He declined and hasn't been heard from since.--Percy