Disputing c 14 dating
They arrived at this conclusion by comparing age estimates obtained using two different methods - analysis of radioactive carbon in a sample and determination of the ratio of uranium to thorium in the sample.In some cases, the latter ratio appears to be a much more accurate gauge of age than the customary method of carbon dating, the scientists said.He did not assume that the date which can be derived from Biblical texts was correct, thereafter adjusting the archaeological findings to fit the Bible.Instead, his assignment of the destruction by fire to around 1400 BC was derived from the following observations: For further information on the evidence that led Garstang to date the fall of Jericho City IV to the latter part of the 15th century BC, see the John Garstang page.
They determined that the Red Lady was in fact a man, and that the ornaments resembled those found at much older sites in continental Europe.
Then, in the twentieth century, carbon dating found the bones to be about 22,000 years old — even though much of Britain was encased in ice and seemingly uninhabitable for part of that time.
When Higham eventually got the bones, his team came up with a more likely scenario: they were closer to 33,000 years old and one of the earliest examples of ceremonial burial in Western Europe.
Since the ongoing debate on this matter is relevant to questions of the veracity of the Bible, the historical background of the debate and its three principal protagonists follows.
The article on British archaeologist John Garstang shows that he dated the destruction of Jericho City IV (the city level associated with Joshua) to the end of the 15th century BC on historical and archaeological grounds.
Search for disputing c 14 dating:
Prior to that, they had to depend on more rudimentary and imprecise methods, such as counting the number of rings on a cross-section of tree trunk.