Origyptian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OCaptain Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Thanks, Ori.
> >
> > You forgot one of my questions:
> >
> > "So, about your first comment above: with which
> > particular equipment do you have experience? "
> >
> >
> > Thank you.
>
> Most of my experience is with scintillography
> hardware which specifically detect the decay
> events. Meanwhile, accelerator mass spectrometers
> (AMS) can see all the C14, not just the ones that
> decay, which is why far smaller samples can be
> analyzed like those taken from Campbell's Chamber
> by the German team.
>
> Regardless of the equipment used, the dating
> process looks at the ratio of C14 to total carbon
> (ie., including stable C12 which constitutes the
> vast majority of carbon in any sample). However,
> the introduction of modern carbon with its fresh
> crop of C14 will significantly throw off the date
> of the sample, especially in very old original
> samples which have only a tiny complement of C14
> remaining, and especially in heated clumps of
> charcoal that may have an enhanced affinity to
> adsorb modern particulate matter (ie, "activated")
> from the ambient environment.


Ori,

So, are you open to my suggestion in the other thread, where I offered to reach out to those with experience in the same equipment used in the 1995 study? And to forward our most discussion-stopping questions to them?

thank you.