Is radiocarbon dating reliable
C." When comparing radiocarbon dates with dates derived from tree rings, known as dendrochronological dating, the dates only agree accurately as far back as A. 640, and only generally well back to the time of Christ.Anything further back and the dates are as much as 800 years off.This book was written on the basis of the calibration that intcal has been developing for over 20 years, a process that has unfolded in the stages listed above. In an article titled "Radiocarbon Daters Tune Up Their Time Machine," magazine explained: "[T]hanks to new and more accurate data from foraminifers, corals, and other sources - plus some fancy statistical treatments that help predict which way data gaps bend the curve - the intcal group has been able to resolve most of the discrepancies.'It took the group quite a while to come together and agree,' says intcal team leader Paula Reimer, a geochronologist at Queen's University Belfast in Northern Ireland.This latest system of dating developed by intcal, an international working group, was based on dating coral samples from the ocean floor.intcal extended radiocarbon dates beyond the limit of dendrochronology by basing it on "matched uranium series and radiocarbon dates on fossil corals, coupled with radiocarbon-dated organic material from laminated marine sediments in the Cariaco Basin, Venzuela" (Mike Walker, ). They apparently increased the effectiveness of radiocarbon dating by basing their calibration charts on radiocarbon-dated coral and sediment layers!
The method they use to attempt to do so is twisted to fit evolutionary theory.That is circular reasoning - defending the method by using the very same method!