Another Hit for the Cassiopaeans? - Radiocarbon Dating

See this article: The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements where it says:

Checking data collected at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island and the Federal Physical and Technical Institute in Germany, they came across something even more surprising: long-term observation of the decay rate of silicon-32 and radium-226 seemed to show a small seasonal variation. The decay rate was ever so slightly faster in winter than in summer.

Was this fluctuation real, or was it merely a glitch in the equipment used to measure the decay, induced by the change of seasons, with the accompanying changes in temperature and humidity?

"Everyone thought it must be due to experimental mistakes, because we're all brought up to believe that decay rates are constant," Sturrock said.

The sun speaks

On Dec 13, 2006, the sun itself provided a crucial clue, when a solar flare sent a stream of particles and radiation toward Earth. Purdue nuclear engineer Jere Jenkins, while measuring the decay rate of manganese-54, a short-lived isotope used in medical diagnostics, noticed that the rate dropped slightly during the flare, a decrease that started about a day and a half before the flare.

If this apparent relationship between flares and decay rates proves true, it could lead to a method of predicting solar flares prior to their occurrence, which could help prevent damage to satellites and electric grids, as well as save the lives of astronauts in space.

The decay-rate aberrations that Jenkins noticed occurred during the middle of the night in Indiana - meaning that something produced by the sun had traveled all the way through the Earth to reach Jenkins' detectors. What could the flare send forth that could have such an effect?

Jenkins and Fischbach guessed that the culprits in this bit of decay-rate mischief were probably solar neutrinos, the almost weightless particles famous for flying at almost the speed of light through the physical world - humans, rocks, oceans or planets - with virtually no interaction with anything.

And here is what the Cs said in June, 1995:

(L) Okay. Let's ditch that one, then. Now, the general scientific opinion is that the major dying of dinosaurs occurred 65 million years
ago. You have given us the figure 27 million years ago. Can you explain the discrepancy?
A: Radio carbon dating is not exact science.

And here's what they said in July 1999:

(A) Carbon dating. Is it incorrect by a factor of two prior to 10,000 years as L has suggested? We observe a factor of 2 variation in the
scientific dating versus your dating. This is a repeating phenomenon on nearly all dates you have given.
A: "They" fail to take into effect the influence of magnetic aberrations caused by ancient cataclysms.
Q: (L) How can these magnetic aberrations affect radiocarbon dating?
A: By altering the isotopal imprints of matter.
Q: So, the cataclysm of about 1500 B.C....
A: All of them scramble the radiological data because of magnetic surges.
 

Vulcan59

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
There was another article which basically said the same thing. Sure counts as a hit for me. :thup:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/213912-Radiocarbon-Dating
 
Top Bottom