Methodology question: why is there no mention of radiocarbon dating? It's one of our most reliable methods, it works on bones, and it doesn't have the same feel as "they used this other random technique and magically got 300,000 years old so lets go with that".
Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
11–20 of 76 posts
Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
#12Methodology question: why is there no mention of radiocarbon dating? It's one of our most reliable methods, it works on bones, and it doesn't have the same feel as "they used this other random technique and magically got 300,000 years old so lets go with that".
As far as I know, the radiocarbon method is only reliable up to 50,000 years ago. Past that you need other dating methods.
Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
#13Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
#14Methodology question: why is there no mention of radiocarbon dating? It's one of our most reliable methods, it works on bones, and it doesn't have the same feel as "they used this other random technique and magically got 300,000 years old so lets go with that".
As far as I know, the radiocarbon method is only reliable up to 50,000 years ago. Past that you need other dating methods.
Why?
Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
#15Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
#16But that's what exciting about science. It doesn't claim to come with ready made answers about our surroundings, humans discover things on their own. Sometimes humans get things wrong, and there is no shame in being wrong with science, it's part of the process, unlike "other domains" where people can or will never admin they are wrong, while still using the product of science every day, in contradiction to their own…
I don't know, the inability to admit being wrong is a human trait and can apply to anyone, including scientists and believers.
Why does everyone think that there's only two "origin" stories and they're both mutually exclusive? I believe in evolution, and I'm a monotheist. I don't reach this conclusion very easily. Why not evolution as God's* way of creating things.
*I hesitate to use this word because of the baggage it carries, but somehow Designer or Creator doesn't seem sufficient here...
Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I know, the radiocarbon method is only reliable up to 50,000 years ago. Past that you need other dating methods.
Why?
from googling: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Nuclear/cardat.ht...
"The low activity of the carbon-14 limits age determinations to the order of 50,000 years by counting techniques."
Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco
#18> Since 2004, Dr. Hublin and his colleagues have been working through layers of rocks on a desert hillside at Jebel Irhoud.
I have so much respect for archeologists. Spending over a decade in one spot, literally on hands and knees, digging and meticulously sifting through anything that is found, is to me the epitome of dedication to a craft.
But another part of me thinks: there must be a better way!
I know that expeditions often hire bands of locals to help them dig and sift. But does anybody know, have there ever been any advances in this field to make the process go faster, or require less human toiling?