Stern@lemmy.worldM to Neat - For neat stuff you found@lemmy.worldEnglish · 17 days ago'Please save it for me': Scientist carbon dates his own kidney stone to find out when it formedwww.abc.net.auexternal-linkmessage-square4fedilinkarrow-up134arrow-down10
arrow-up134arrow-down1external-link'Please save it for me': Scientist carbon dates his own kidney stone to find out when it formedwww.abc.net.auStern@lemmy.worldM to Neat - For neat stuff you found@lemmy.worldEnglish · 17 days agomessage-square4fedilink
minus-squareTachyonTele@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·17 days agoI don’t think that’s how carbon dating works. Unless it’s gotten extremely accurate recently.
minus-squareTexasDrunk@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·17 days agoThree weeks ago Thursday, plus or minus a few hundred years. Obviously I’m talking shit, but I was under the impression that the newer something is the less accurate carbon dating it would be.
minus-squareGnugit@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·edit-217 days agoHe used the bomb pulse which is dated off carbon 14 from nuclear bomb tests in the 50s. It’s written in the article.
minus-squareTachyonTele@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·17 days agoRight, that’s how they usually do it. Idk apparently he could date to 15 years ago. I guess it’s gotten much more accurate lately.
I don’t think that’s how carbon dating works.
Unless it’s gotten extremely accurate recently.
Three weeks ago Thursday, plus or minus a few hundred years.
Obviously I’m talking shit, but I was under the impression that the newer something is the less accurate carbon dating it would be.
He used the bomb pulse which is dated off carbon 14 from nuclear bomb tests in the 50s. It’s written in the article.
Right, that’s how they usually do it.
Idk apparently he could date to 15 years ago. I guess it’s gotten much more accurate lately.