LogFAQs > #975256735

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, Database 12 ( 11.2023-? ), Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Do any of you here doubt the accuracy of radiocarbon or radiometric dating?
adjl 08/04/23 8:42:31 PM #29:	potdnewb posted... most stones dont contain carbon Which is why I said radiometric dating and not radiocarbon dating. Whiterun_Guard_ posted... So I guess that means none of our current carbon was created in a star. I figured it was something like that, but I realized I wasn't actually 100% sure when I read your question. Today I... learned? Confirmed? Remembered something I probably already learned? Eh, whatever. The important thing is that I know now. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:975256735] in Do any of ... [t:80527891]...</cite> <quote>potdnewb posted... </cite><quote>most stones dont contain carbon</quote>Which is why I said radiometric dating and not radiocarbon dating.Whiterun_Guard_ posted... </cite><quote>So I guess that means none of our current carbon was created in a star.</quote>I figured it was something like that, but I realized I wasn't actually 100% sure when I read your question. Today I... learned? Confirmed? Remembered something I probably already learned? Eh, whatever. The important thing is that I know now. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1