When news is announced on the discovery of an archaeological find, we often hear about how the age of the sample was determined using radiocarbon dating, otherwise simply known as carbon dating. Deemed the gold standard of archaeology, the method was developed in the late s and is based on the idea that radiocarbon carbon 14 is being constantly created in the atmosphere by cosmic rays which then combine with atmospheric oxygen to form CO2, which is then incorporated into plants during photosynthesis.

When the plant or animal that consumed the foliage dies, it emily feld onlyfans exchanging carbon with the environment and from there on in it is simply a case of measuring how errors carbon 14 has been carbon, giving its age.

But new research conducted by Cornell University could be about to throw the field of archaeology on its head with the claim that there could be a number of inaccuracies in commonly accepted carbon dating standards.

How radiocarbon dating works

If this is dating, then many of our established historical timelines are thrown into question, potentially needing a re-write dating the history books. In a paper published to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciencesthe team led by archaeologist Stuart Manning carbon variations in the carbon 14 cycle at certain periods of time throwing off timelines by as much as 20 years.

The possible reason for this, the team believes, could be due to climatic conditions in our distant past. This is because pre-modern carbon 14 chronologies rely on standardised northern and southern hemisphere calibration curves to determine specific dates and are based on the assumption that carbon 14 levels are similar and stable across both hemispheres.

However, atmospheric measurements from the last 50 years show varying carbon 14 levels throughout. Additionally, we know that plants typically grow at different times in different parts of the northern hemisphere.

Latest News

To test this oversight, the researchers measured a series of carbon 14 ages in southern Jordan tree rings calculated as being from between and Sure enough, it showed that plant material in the southern Dating danmark showed an average carbon offset of about 19 years compared with the current northern hemisphere errors calibration curve.

Related: climatearchaeologyresearchhistorychemistry. Colm Gorey was a senior journalist with Silicon Republic. Login Subscribe.

Carbon-14 dating, explained

Carbon dating accuracy called into question after major flaw discovery by Colm Gorey 6 Jun Save article. Standards too simplified This is because pre-modern carbon 14 chronologies rely on standardised northern dating southern hemisphere calibration curves to determine specific dates and are based on the assumption that carbon 14 levels are similar and errors across both hemispheres.

Pin This. Colm Gorey was a senior journalist with Silicon Republic editorial siliconrepublic. You May Also Like. More from Science. Latest News More.