Skip to comments.New Method Could Revolutionize Dating of Ancient Treasures
Posted on 03/24/2010 5:54:06 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
In conventional dating methods, scientists remove a small sample from an object, such as a cloth or bone fragment. Then they treat the sample with a strong acid and a strong base and finally burn the sample in a small glass chamber to produce carbon dioxide gas to analyze its C-14 content.
Rowe's new method, called "non-destructive carbon dating," eliminates sampling, the destructive acid-base washes, and burning. In the new method, scientists place an entire artifact in a special chamber with a plasma, an electrically charged gas similar to gases used in big-screen plasma television displays. The gas slowly and gently oxidizes the surface of the object to produce carbon dioxide for C-14 analysis without damaging the surface, he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at eurekalert.org ...
New Method Could Revolutionize Dating of Turin Shroud"In the case of the shroud of Turin, we would roll the cloth into as tight a package as we can make it," Rowe said.
by Rossella Lorenzi
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Turin shroud already underwent carbon-14 dating in 1988. At that time, three reputable laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Ariz., concluded that the cloth on which the smudged outline of the body of a man is indelibly impressed was a medieval fake dating from 1260 to 1390, and not the burial cloth wrapped around the body of Christ.
However, the radiocarbon dating did not prevent many scholars from formulating various hypotheses over the validity of the carbon-14 tests, including the possibility that they were conducted on a sample taken from a medieval patch.
Rowe's method could finally put aside such speculation since it could place the date for the entire shroud.
To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
In before the predictable posting of a Helen Thomas pic.
“Dating of Ancient Treasures”
I immediately thought of Clinton saying “that’s a good-looking mummy”. I freep too much.
I date an ancient treasure every saturday night!
Nobody bring up the dinosaurs dep’t — I know it’ll come up, so:
[snp] Radioactive carbon, produced when nitrogen 14 is bombarded by cosmic rays in the atmosphere, drifts down to earth and is absorbed from the air by plants. Animals eat the plants and take C14 into their bodies. Humans in turn take carbon 14 into their bodies by eating both plants and animals. When a living organism dies, it stops absorbing C14 and the C14 that is already in the object begins to disintegrate. Scientists can use this fact to measure how much C14 has disintegrated and how much is left in the object. Carbon 14 decays at a slow but steady rate and reverts to nitrogen 14. The rate at which Carbon decays (Half-life) is known: C14 has a half-life of 5730 years. Basically this means that half of the original amount of C14 in organic matter will have disintegrated 5730 years after the organisms death; half of the remaining C14 will have disintegrated after another 5730 years and so forth. After about 50,000 years, the amount of C14 remaining will be so small that the fossil can’t be dated reliably. [nsnp]
first Americans (sidebar link):
Well played. ;’)
I’d hit it.
Is that a brag or a cry out for help?
Only if my “treasure” doesn’t read this.....
The bulk of the sample would have to be intrusions to have much impact. :’)
The article states 'Ancient Treasures' not 'Ancient Relics'!
I thought that we couldn’t carbon date bone fossils because fossilization replaces the organic material with dissolved minerals. I was also under the impression that the R/C dating of the Shroud of Turin was of questionable value due to a fire that occured in the cathedral around the time that the tests indicated as the age of the Shroud.
As post #6 says, carbon 14 dating is only possible to about 50,000 years ago. Typical fossils run to millions, or hundreds of millions of years old. Even fossils younger than 50,000 years, if they have no actual bone left, must be dated by methods other than carbon 14.
This article lists at least 18 other radio-metric methods, besides carbon 14, for dating more ancient materials.
An example is Uranium-Lead dating.
There have been claims that the repair portions sewn or woven (I dunno which) into the cloth after some fire damage centuries ago were the only bits used for the carbon dating. They weren’t. However, see the wiki-wacky-pedia:
the RC dating paper’s abstract:
If the carbonized portions of the cloth (iow, right at the point where the newer and older were joined) had been used, it *could* result in skewed results — but if so, the skew would be toward an *older* than actual date, rather than the reverse (iow, it would appear older, not younger than actual).
The samples were taken instead from the corners, which are image-free and basically just plain cloth, which minimizes damage and takes material from a part where no one is going to look anyway. :’)
One man’s trash...
The cathedral was built with medieval timbers.
These timbers would contain carbon atoms reflecting the ratio of C12to C14 appropriate for the time when they were cut to build the cathedral.
R/C dating operates on the principle that organic material ingests atmospheric carbon and the amount of atmospheric carbon is fixed when the organic material dies.
The atmospheric percentage of C12 to C14 is known, so that if the sample precentage is different, we can apply the decay rate of C14 to determine how many years have elapsed since the material stopped absorbing atmospheric carbon.
But, the fire would have released large amounts of CO2 from the medieval timbers, which would contaminate the entire cloth, not just the parts that were repaired.
The R/C dating method involves releasing CO2 from the material to obtain the carbon needed to study the ratio.
Because the fire contaminated the cloth with CO2 from a later date, the test may not be correct.
This wasn't Bible-thumpers who came up with this. Even if the R/C method proved it to be a forgery, the Shroud of Turin still poses an intriguing mystery - how did they do it? We still don't know.
There’s nothing that could convince some folks here that the earth is over 10,000 years old.
Sorry Sunken...I know that’s a fake...she is older than that!
“Theres nothing that could convince some folks here that the earth is over 10,000 years old.”
I believe the earth and the universe is ‘eons’ old. I believe this creation is about 6,000 years old. It seems reasonable that the unexplained, ‘acient’ fossil evidence is from a previous creation, on this same earth. It is likely that the dinasaurs existed in that previous creation. The ‘Great Ice Age’ that covered much or most of the earth with glaciers probably was before this creation.
Lucifer, when he was still ‘one of the good guys’ was given dominion over the earth - I believe that was dominion over a creation - living, breathing creatures, likely humanoids. It seems likely that when Lucifer (Satan) became the would-be-usurper and was cast out of heaven, the creation existing then was destroyed, likely by flood and deep freeze.
Just my thoughts. Of course, none of this matters. We will be shown more someday, if it is important, and we will know. ‘Til then, just relax and enjoy the ride, focusing on Him! He is in control!
Interesting thoughts.....I don’t quite see it that way myself, but thanks.
Sounds like a handbook for gigolos who go after rich prunes.
Oh sure, look on the bright side.
|GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach|
Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.