Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBrug, John F.
dc.date.accessioned2015-06-09T12:59:35Z
dc.date.available2015-06-09T12:59:35Z
dc.date.issued1980
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/880
dc.description.abstractJohn F. Brug’s essay critically examines the assumptions and limitations of scientific dating methods, particularly radiocarbon (C-14) dating. He explains the principles behind C-14 formation, decay, and measurement, noting that while the method appears objective, it relies on assumptions about the constancy of the earth’s carbon reservoir and decay rates. Brug highlights factors that can distort results, including fossil fuel emissions, nuclear testing, geomagnetic and climatic changes, isotopic fractionation, and laboratory inconsistencies. He also critiques dendrochronology (tree-ring dating) as a calibration method, noting uncertainties in ring formation. Additional concerns include sample contamination, subjective data rejection, and inconsistent reporting. Brug briefly discusses thermoluminescence (TL) dating of pottery, acknowledging its potential but emphasizing its current unreliability due to wide error margins. He concludes that while scientific dating methods offer useful tools, their results must be interpreted cautiously and critically, especially in archaeological and historical contexts. Abstract prepared by Microsoft Copilot (GPT-4).
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectCarbon Datingen_US
dc.subjectScientific Datingen_US
dc.titleScientific Datingen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record