首頁加入會員會員登入點數說明網站地圖聯絡我們奉獻支持 (尚未登入) 聖經QR 5月20日 星期一
更多>>
 

服務列表
靈修
資訊
社群
知識
分享
遊戲
台灣聖經網
靈糧中心 線上奉獻
代禱信 登廣告


全民塗鴉牆 快人快語 生活分享 愛秀圖片 我心經句
我的部落格 分享快人快語 分享生活分享 分享愛秀圖片 分享我心經句

您尚未登入網站,無法參與回應及分享 [我要登入]

碳定测年法,2018年发现重大缺陷后,准确性受到质疑

分享人: 基仔二
分享日期: 2020/02/08
檢舉內容: 檢舉不當內容/回應
回應:
推薦給好友:

碳定测年法,2018年发现重大缺陷后,准确性受到质疑

在进化论有关的辩论中,“年龄”,无论是宇宙,是地球,是某化石,年龄的测量通常有赖碳14测年法。下面是一篇2018年的科学研究消息,我只有时间翻译其中重要的几句。

「Carbon dating accuracy called into question after major flaw discovery发现重大缺陷后,碳定年准确性受到质疑」

by Colm Gorey

6 JUN 201835.98K VIEWS

https://www.siliconrepublic.com/innovation/carbon-dating-accuracy-major-flaw

Though one of the most essential tools for determining an ancient object’s age, carbon dating might not be as accurate as we once thought. 尽管碳测年法是确定古代物体年龄的最重要工具之一,但碳测年法可能不像我们曾经想像的那样准确。

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 1940s 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 stops exchanging carbon with the environment and from there on in it is simply a case of measuring how much carbon 14 has been emitted, 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. 公认的碳测年标准可能存在许多不准确之处。

If this is true, then many of our established historical timelines are thrown into question, potentially needing a re-write of the history books. 如果这是真的,那么我们建立的许多历史时间表都会受到质疑,可能需要重写历史书籍。

In a paper published to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the team led by archaeologist Stuart Manning identified 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. 团队认为,可能的原因可能是由于我们遥远的过去的气候条件。

Standards too simplified标准过于简化

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. 但是,最近50年的大气测量结果显示,整个过程中的碳14含量都在变化。Additionally, we know that plants typically grow at different times in different parts of the northern hemisphere.

To test this oversight, the researchers measured a series of carbon 14 ages in southern Jordan tree rings calculated as being from between 1610 and 1940.

Sure enough, it showed that plant material in the southern Levant showed an average carbon offset of about 19 years compared with the current northern hemisphere standard calibration curve.

“There has been much debate for several decades among scholars arguing for different chronologies sometimes only decades to a century apart, each with major historical implications. And yet these studies […] may all be inaccurate since they are using the wrong radiocarbon information,” Manning said.

“Our work should prompt a round of revisions and rethinking for the timeline of the archaeology and early history of the southern Levant through the early Biblical period.”

===============================================

所以,以为进化论所发表的“年代”是历史,自显无知。



網友回應
尚未登入,無法參與回應

以上廣告為中華基督教網路發展協會廣告連播系統,歡迎教會機構免費使用