Crontrovertial Carbon Dating

Controversial Carbon Dating

The continuous formation of the radioactive isotope of carbon-14 occurs in the upper atmosphere when neutrons produced by the cosmic rays interact with atmospheric nitrogen atoms. Carbon-14 unites with oxygen to form radioactive carbon dioxide, which then mixes throughout the atmosphere. Through the food chain and photosynthesis, radioactive carbon dioxide becomes a part of all plant and animal life. Because, carbon-14 is formed by cosmic ray neutrons at an almost constant rate, and is also lost by radioactive decay, an equilibrium concentration of carbon-14 is established. This is how radiocarbon dating is possible. By measuring the carbon-14 concentration in an object such as dead wood, and comparing it with the concentration in living wood, the age of the dead wood can be determined. In the perspective of works of art, radiocarbon dating is applied to materials such as ivory, wood, bone, textiles, leather, parchment, and paper. Radiocarbon dating has a significant role in the dating of works of art. However, not all results are completely reliable.1

It's been almost fourteen years since the introduction of carbon-14 dating, but the process is still not perfected. Many steps to the procedure are assumptions and estimates which contribute to the lack of accuracy. The carbon-14 concentration in living plants and animals has always been the same as it is now. This is the basic assumption on which radiocarbon dating depends. For a number of reasons, this assumption is not strictly valid. Therefore, in order to get hold of true calendar dates, and radiocarbon dates must first be standardized. A distinct curve of measurement extending back about 8,000 years ago has now been established using long sequences of three-rings dated by dendrochronology. Despite the carefully mapped out procedure, there are still holes within the system that keep it from being one hundred percent dependable. 2

There have been a few case studies presented to discuss the controversy over whether or not radiocarbon dating is effective and reliable. In 1990, Michel Lorblanchet announced that direct dating was going to play a definitive role in Paleolithic studies. Since then, critics have claimed that carbon dating was going to replace the use of style in establishing chronologies. However, this was just a mere understanding. 3

Style continued to play a dominant role because very few paintings were eligible for radioactive dating. Few paintings contained organic material, and on top of that, the process is extremely expensive. Direct dating and stylistic chronology compliment each other, and expose each other's inconsistencies. 4

Some radio carbon dates are sometimes in acute conflict with stylistic expectations. This demands a new perspective on the artistic sequence. It is not always the style that needs rethinking, but the sources of radiocarbon error are well known. There are many things that can alter the effectiveness of radiocarbon dating. Such examples include risks of contamination, the small size of available samples, complex chemical history, lack of association between samples, and the relative lack of experimentation in pre-treatment. A case study at the Chauvet caves (Ardиche, France) provides proof that comlex chemical history is one, of many, forms