Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMY ANDERSON <=-

That was my first thought as well, materials from earlier eruptions,
but there was some wild inaccuracy there. It sort of sounds like
the numbers were thrown off when the organic materials rather than
just dying normally were subjected to the super high heat of the
lava flow there. There was talk about layers of charred bark from
other eruptions too which added to the confusion.

Interesting. So it might be hard for them to accurately date any of it...

I suppose things that 'died' in a normal way can be dated fairly accurately but if they end up in Lava or spend hundreds of years
under water or something, it sounds like it could be a problem.
Lava and fire contact is likely by far the worst.

I think the most accurate results they've gotten were on plants
and animals that died in the far north and have been frozen and
buried under the ice for the last XX,000 years..

Well... Accurate based on current models. :-)



... Computer Hacker wanted. Must have own axe.
=== MultiMail/Mac v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.32-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (618:250/24)

digimaus wrote to Rob Mccart <=-

Rob Mccart wrote to JIMMY ANDERSON <=-

I think the most accurate results they've gotten were on plants
and animals that died in the far north and have been frozen and
buried under the ice for the last XX,000 years..

Carbon-14 dating is good for up to 60,000 years. There are other
dating methods but they are expensive and hard to work with.

Assuming something didn't artificially age it - or affect the half life.



... Cap'n - the spell checker kinna take this abuse.
=== MultiMail/Mac v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.32-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (618:250/24)