TIL radiocarbon dating isn't as precise as TV makes it look

Everyone acts like a carbon date is a magic number, but I've seen two labs return results 400 years apart on the same charred grain from a dig near Santa Fe. It's all about calibration curves and the sample's context, not some absolute clock. We treat those dates like gospel when they're really just a range with a lot of wiggle. Has anyone else had a site interpretation fall apart because the lab results contradicted the stratigraphy?

0 comments

0 Comments

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this discussion.