========================================================================= Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 13:36:08 -0600 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: "Timothy H. Heaton" Subject: New Northwest Coast Researchers list I have recently set up a new list for researchers working the glaciated Pacific coast of North America in any discipline. The primary issues are the timing and pattern of deglaciation and sea level change, colonization of glaciated areas, the controversy surrounding coastal refugia and isolated populations of large mammals during the Ice Age, and the Coastal Migration theory for the peopling of the Americas by early humans. Those interested in participating should send the command SUBSCRIBE SITKA as an e-mail message to . Please pass the word to potentially interested parties. Timothy H. Heaton /|Mountains /| theaton@sunbird.usd.edu Professor of Earth Sciences /::|Deserts /::| Phone: (605) 677-6122 University of South Dakota /::::|Caves /::::| FAX: (605) 677-6121 Vermillion, SD 57069 /::::::| /::::::| Radio: WB7NMY ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 18:42:03 -0800 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Dick Meehan Subject: Holocene Climate In-Reply-To: Does anyone know of a news group with focus on mid holocene climatic change, including paleoclimatic evidence (ice cores, dendro, etc) and applications (archaeology, geomorphology, etc) Dick Meehan ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 07:00:13 NST Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Dave Liverman Subject: Re: Holocene Climate In-Reply-To: ; from "Dick Meehan" at Feb 2, 96 6:42 pm > > Does anyone know of a news group with focus on mid holocene climatic > change, including paleoclimatic evidence (ice cores, dendro, etc) and > applications (archaeology, geomorphology, etc) > > Dick Meehan > Dick did not include his e-mail, so I've sent this to the group as a whole. QUATERNARY is a listserv group designed for discussion of all topics in Quaternary science, including those menyioned by Dick. We have nearly 800 members world-wide, and it's a moderately active forum. To subscribe:- send to following e-mail messege to listserv@morgan.ucs.mun.ca subscribe quaternary your name ^^^^^^^^^ insert your name (not e-mail address) here. no subject required cheers Dave -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Liverman, Internet:dgl@zeppo.geosurv.gov.nf.ca Newfoundland Geological Survey, ********************************* Department of Natural Resources, * Listowner, QUATERNARY * P.O. Box 8700 * To subscribe send the message * St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 4J6 * subscribe quaternary your name * Canada * to listserv@morgan.ucs.mun.ca * phone 709-729-4014 ********************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 09:33:21 -0700 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: David Sewell Subject: Proposed Usenet sci.archaeology.moderated Doug Weller has asked that the following [long] notice of request for discussion of a new Usenet newsgroup, sci.archaeology.moderated, be distributed to archaeology-related mailing lists. If you are interested in participating in the discussion and probable voting, check the group news.groups for relevant threads. If any C14-L subscribers have looked at the current sci.archaeology within the past year or two, they understand the rationale for creating a moderated group: maybe 80% of the postings there these days are about the lost ark, Velikovsky, alien origin of pyramids, etc., etc. Though at least there aren't too many attacks on C-14 dating on the grounds that the world is only 6000 years old, last I saw... ====forwarded message follows==== From: Doug Weller Subject: RFD: sci.archaeology.moderated moderated Followup-To: news.groups Date: 3 Feb 1996 02:30:07 -0000 Lines: 302 REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) moderated group sci.archaeology.moderated This is a formal Request For Discussion on the creation of a new worldwide Usenet newsgroup, sci.archaeology.moderated. This is not a Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details are below. Newsgroup line: sci.archaeology.moderated All aspects of archaeology. (Moderated) RATIONALE: sci.archaeology.moderated This newsgroup would *not* replace any of the existing groups (sci.archaeology, sci.archaeology.mesoamerican, and alt.archaeology). It would meet a long-standing demand for a moderated newsgroup for the discussion of archaeology without flames and without the 'speculative' postings that have put many people off in the past. It would still leave any and all posters the forums that currently exist, so there can be no question of denying anyone an outlet for their ideas. CHARTER: sci.archaeology.moderated Sci.archaeology.moderated is to be a moderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of archaeology, the study of the past through its material culture. All viewpoints and levels of knowledge are welcome, subject to the moderation policy described below. Because archaeology is such a broad subject and because lively debate on archaeological issues is encouraged, this group is moderated by a panel of several people and prospective articles are assigned randomly to any moderator for approval. Moderators will represent both professional and amateur archaeologists. This method will hopefully lead to the fastest turn-around time and least intrusion possible. Articles will never be rejected based on whether the moderator(s) disagree with the accuracy of the article. It is hoped that almost every poster's article will be approved as soon as is humanly possible. The text itself will either be accepted as is, or rejected -- however if only a minor aspect of an article is inappropriate, the moderator will usually suggest changes. Moderation Policy: Articles may be requests for information, announcements of relevance, etc. Lengthy quoting (more than 30 lines) of source material must be accompanied by commentary or by other text which ties it to on-going discussions. Articles which quote substantially the same source material repetitively will not be approved. Articles consisting of materials which are available on-line at ftp or WWW sites will not be approved, rather pointers to sites may be given. Moderators may waive this rule at their discretion. Articles which contain personal attacks of any sort, racist comments, etc. will not be approved for posting. Disagreements are welcome (so long as they contain no flames), but if a thread looks as though it's never going to be resolved, the moderators reserve the right to terminate it/suspend it until new evidence is produced. Blank messages, test messages, advertisements, MAKE.MONEY.FAST, binaries, uuencoded messages, and so forth, will not be approved for posting. This will not be a forum for the discussion of 'alternative archaeology' such as that contained in Velikovsky's works, Von Daniken, etc. Please note that this specifically includes 'hyperdiffusionism', the proposition that geographically isolated cultures (mainly in the Americas) developed because of 'outside influences' from Asia, Europe, Egypt, etc. Such posts are not welcome not only because they fall under the classification of 'alternative archaeology' but also because the rejection of independent invention inherent in hyperdifusionism is racist. So if you want to post something arguing that the Celts or Israelis were the real Mound Builders, or that Egyptians told the Mayans how to build pyramids, expect it to be rejected unless you can offer cites from accepted professional journals. You will still have the existing newsgroups (eg sci.archaeology and alt.archaeology) where you can post such articles. Moderators may, at their discretion, change the Subject: lines for threads which have strayed from the initial subject. Cross-posting is discouraged. Rejected articles which would be acceptable after editing will be returned to the poster with an explanation and suggestions for change. Articles rejected for other reasons may be shared with the other moderators for group consideration if the poster wishes to appeal. Any article that contains more than fifty percent quoted material (and the author's signature shall not count as original material for purposes of determining the proportion) may be trimmed or rejected at the discretion of the moderator. In exercising this discretion, the moderator shall take readability considerations into account, such as the amount of quoted material at the beginning of the message, and the size of the blocks of quoted material. If the entire length of the article (excluding header and signature) is less than 24 lines of 80 characters, then the requirement of 50% original material _may_ be waived at the moderator's discretion. In keeping with Usenet netiquette conventions, signatures should be restricted to 4 or 5 lines. Moderators may, at their discretion, trim .sigs to four lines before posting articles. All articles should have at least a short signature block containing the sender's name and email address. If this is missing, moderators may add one at their discretion. Moderators: Anyone may volunteer to join the moderation panel with the consent of a two-thirds supermajority of the current moderators. If the number of moderators fall below 8, volunteers will be solicited by a posting to the newsgroup. An automatic script will be used to share postings among the moderators. It is important to have a clear policy to cover the possibility that there is conflict in the affairs of the moderation panel itself. It is generally believed that moderators will come and go throughout the course of the group, and in all cases the goal will be a consensus amongst the panel regarding the addition of new moderators. A standard group decision process will be followed: a motion will be made to add a new moderator, and if there are no objections it will go ahead. Friendly relations are certainly expected. If there is an objection to a motion, and a group decision is not reached by discussion, a vote can be carried out in accordance with the statements below. In any of the following cases, a secret ballot may be requested -- and if a suitable (meaning: agreeably neutral) volunteer on the panel to collect the ballots cannot be found, will be carried out via point #5 below -- but voting will generally be public (within the confines of the moderation panel itself). 1. If it comes to a vote, new moderators must be approved by a supermajority (75% rounded downward, ie. two out of three moderators, eight out of eleven moderators, nine out of twelve moderators, etc.) amongst the moderation panel. Abstentions will not affect the outcome of this vote, meaning that a supermajority among voting moderators must be obtained. In the case of only two voting moderators who disagree, the prospective moderator will not be added. 2. Moderators who will be on vacation for more than a day or two are expected to have their names removed from the active file for that period. This implies no permanent change in status, and they will be simply returned to active duty afterward. 3. Moderators can be removed by a supermajority (as above) vote amongst the moderation panel (including the moderator in question). Abstentions will count as votes against removal. 4. If there is controversy amongst the moderators concerning the application of these guidelines, the moderation panel agrees to submit to binding arbitration by moderators-advice at UUNET. This situation covers true interpretive controversy, as well as such technical scenarios as: only two moderators, one wanting to remove the other; so many moderators on extended leave or genuinely unresponsive that the active panel cannot remove them to get on with business, etc. 5. Any votes or motions may be called into question by moderators returning from leaves of absence. 6. All prospective moderators must agree to abide by these guidelines in their entirety before consideration for moderator status. By acting as a moderator, this point is implied, regardless of written confirmation. Changes: It requires unanimous approval of the moderation panel to change these guidelines, and they must remain within the boundaries given in the original CFV charter. END CHARTER. MODERATOR INFO: sci.archaeology.moderated Moderator: Doug Weller Amateur, interest in Roman Britain Moderator: Jeff Baker Mayanist Moderator: Julian Barker Amateur, Egyptology, European Neolithic and Bronze Age and Ancient Middle Eastern Languages Moderator: Kathy Bartsch Student, Arch-Student List Owner Moderator: Philip Blair Amateur, interest in standing stones Moderator: Ariane Burke Asst Prof. of anthropology subfield arch) with U. of Manitoba Moderator: John Carr Professional, Americanist, a sysop on the Delphi Archaeology and History forum Moderator: John A. Giacobbe Western Archaeological Services, Inc. Moderator: Gerard Alan Latham Amateur, committee member with the Wallingford Historical and Archaeological Society Moderator: Vince Russett <100652.3047@CompuServe.COM> County Archaeologist for Avon, England Moderator: Adrian Tribe Professional Archaeological Conservator, English Heritage Moderator: Steve Whittet Moderator: Mary Beth Williams END MODERATOR INFO. PROCEDURE: This is a request for discussion, not a call for votes. In this phase of the process, any potential problems with the proposed newsgroups should be raised and resolved. The discussion period will continue for a minimum of 21 days (starting from from when the first RFD for this proposal is posted to news.announce.newgroups). All discussion should be posted to news.groups. At the end of the discussion period, a Call for Votes (CFV) will be posted by a neutral vote taker. This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and "How to Make a New Group Proposal". Please refer to these documents if you have questions about the process. DISTRIBUTION: This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups: news.groups, news.announce.newgroups, sci.anthropology, sci.archaeology, sci.archaeology.mesoamerican, alt.archaeology, soc.history, soc.history.moderated, soc.history.medieval This message will also be sent to the following mailing lists after the RFD has appeared in news.announce.newgroups: AEGEANET majordomo@acpub.duke.edu AIA-L listserv@brynmawr.edu ANCIEN-L listserv@ulkyvm.louisville.edu ANE majordomo@oi.uchicago.edu ANTHRO-L listserv@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu ARCH-ARCTIC maiser@natmus.min.dk ARCH-L listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu ARCH-STUDENT listproc@lists.colorado.edu ARCH-THEORY mailbase@mailbase.ac.uk ARTIFACT listserv@umdd.umd.edu AZTLAN listserv@ulkyvm.louisville.edu BRITARCH mailbase@mailbase.ac.uk C14-L listserv@listserv.arizona.edu CONSDIST consdist-request@lindy.stanford.edu EAAN lstsrv@ccat.sas.upenn.edu HISTARCH listserv@asuvm.inre.asu.edu NAUTARCH nautarch-request@santafe.edu NUMISM-L listserv@univscvm.csd.scarolina.edu PACARC-L listserv@listproc.wsu.edu PAPY papy@igl.ku.dk ROCK-ART listserv@asuvm.inre.asu.edu ROMARCH majordomo@rome.classics.lsa.umich.edu SAS-net jhburton@macc.wisc.ed SPANBORD listserv@asuvm.inre.asu.edu SUB-ARCH listserv@asuvm.inre.asu.edu XYLHIST-L listserv@bloxwich.demon.co.uk PROPONENTS: Doug Weller Jeff Baker Julian Barker Kathy Bartsch Philip Blair Eric Brunner Ariane Burke John Carr Tim Church Kathryn Conners Lachlan Cranswick Loren Crow Patrick Crowe John A. Giacobbe Steve Glines James Harvey Gerard Latham M.A. Latta Stewart Mac Intyre James Petts Adam D. Philippidis Gordon Rugg Vince Russett <100652.3047@CompuServe.COM> Douglas Rutherford Adrian Tribe Steve Whittet Mary Beth Williams MENTOR: Todd M. McComb -- Doug Weller "We must know the truth, and we must love the truth we know, and we must act according to the measure of our love." Thomas Merton ***'De Chelonian Mobile!'*** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 23:45:29 -0500 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Brad Harrison Subject: Dead Sea Scrolls Hello, I am new to the list. May I ask for some information of where I can get my hands on the C14 dates of the Dead Sea Scrolls. What documents were tested and how many times they were tested etc. etc. I also want the TL (thermaluninence dates) if they were done, from the jars those scrolls were found in, the full report.:-) Thank You Bradley Harrison Phila. PA MA JS Gratz College ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 08:30:17 -0700 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: David Sewell Subject: Re: Dead Sea Scrolls In-Reply-To: <199602050447.VAA285060@listserv.ccit.arizona.edu> from "Brad Harrison" at Feb 4, 96 11:45:29 pm > May I ask for some information of where I can get my hands on the C14 >dates of the Dead Sea Scrolls. What documents were tested and how many times >they were tested etc. etc. The most recent article on the scrolls we've run in RADIOCARBON was Jull et al, Vol. 37, No. 1, 1995. You'll find references to other articles on dating there. Don't know about TL dates, though. -- David Sewell, Assistant Editor RADIOCARBON: An International Journal of Cosmogenic Isotope Research Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona 4717 E. Ft. Lowell Rd., Tucson, Arizona 85712 USA Telephone: 1-520-881-0857 Fax: 1-520-881-0554 General e-mail address: c14@packrat.aml.arizona.edu WWW server: http://packrat.aml.arizona.edu/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 13:13:40 -0700 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Timothy Jull Subject: Re: Dead Sea Scrolls In-Reply-To: <01I0U0TGF9QQ9D4KUT@delphi.com> In reply to your question, there are 2 papers on dating of the DSS. 1. Jull et al. Radiocarbon, vol. 37, no. 1, p 11-19 (1995) 2. Bonani et al. Radiocarbon, vol. Radiocarbon, vol 34, no. 3, 843-849 (1992) Tim Jull -------------------------------------------------------------- A. J. Timothy Jull tel. (520) 621-6816 NSF Arizona AMS Facility, fax. (520) 621-9619 Physics Building, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 University of Arizona AMS Lab Web-Page: http://www.physics.arizona.edu/ams/www1.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 5 Feb 1996 15:18:55 -0800 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Dick Meehan Subject: Scarcity of C-14 Dates I read in the archaeological literature on Avebury that there was a dearth of C-14 dates in Britain from about 3200 to 2600 BCE. No apparent explanation offered, and the database was small, less than 100 or so dates. Does anyone know whether this claim has been sustained in recent years, and if it is discussed in the literature? Could this be related to the so-called "Piora Oscillation" touched on in Prof Lamb's climate book, or is this a dated concept? Dick Meehan (Amateur) meehan@blume.stanford.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 15:39:03 -0800 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Robert Ackerman Subject: Re: Holocene Climate >Does anyone know of a news group with focus on mid holocene climatic >change, including paleoclimatic evidence (ice cores, dendro, etc) and >applications (archaeology, geomorphology, etc) > >Dick Meehan Dick I would be interested in such a list as well. Bob Ackerman Department of Anthropology Washington State University ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 08:38:58 GMT Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: "A.Bayliss" Subject: Re: Scarcity of C-14 Dates Over the period you mention, English Heritage has recently funded nearly 50 new dates on material from Stonehenge. See http:\\www.eng-h.gov.uk\stoneh or Cleal, Montague, and Walker 1995 Twentieth-century Excavations at Stonehenge. Alex ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 13:36:20 +1200 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Tom Higham Subject: Radiocarbon WEB-info update We have collated the following links on the Radiocarbon WEB-info pages (http://www2.waikato.ac.nz/c14/webinfo/index.html) concerned with radiocarbon applications which may be of interest to some on the List members. As always, additions, corrections, offers to contribute etc are welcome. If you know of any information which may have been missed, and I'm sure there is a great deal, please contact me. This information is archived at http://www2.waikato.ac.nz/c14/webinfo/applic.html ARCHAEOLOGY Radiocarbon dating the Dead Sea scrolls (Page describing the recent radiocarbon dating of some of the Dead Sea scrolls at the Arizona AMS facility). Northeastern PalaeoIndian Radiocarbon Database. Debert, a palaeoIndian site in Nova Scotia. Extensive radiocarbon dating from the Debert site, Nova Scotia indicates occupation between 10 600 and 10700 BP. Archaeometry and Stonehenge. Presentation of results of excavations and dating of the Stonehenge 20th century excavations project. Dating Stonehenge. 52 radiocarbon dates have been measured in the re-excavation of parts of this famous archaeological site. Datation des peintures de la grotte Chauvet. A new radiocarbon series from the recent Ard=E8che rock art find are the earliest currently known for rock art in the region (in French). Recherche en art pari=E9tal pr=E9historique. More research and dates for Fre= nch rock art sites (in French). Archaeological research at Oslonki, Poland. The site of Oslonki is dated by 24 radiocarbon dates which when calibrated to calendar years point to occupation between 4300 and 4000 B.C. OCEANOGRAPHY The World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE); at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. Measuring bomb carbon in the E. Pacific to understand better the processes of ocean circulation. Ocean sediment C-14 data. The Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University has compiled 974 C-14 dates from 309 ocean sediments cores, covering the period from 40,000 years BP to the present worldwide. PALAEOENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES The America's Project A palaeovegetational reconstruction of the North and S= outh Americam continents using a radiocarbon dated timeframe from 15-9 ky BP. Wrangel Island Mammoths. Abstract of the Radiocarbon article of the fascinating discovery that mamoths were still alive on this subarctic island at 2000 BC. TephraBase. Radiocarbon Search Search the Tephrabase directory for radiocarbon dated volcanic tephras. PALE Russian Radiocarbon Database by site and list for Canadian sites. PALAEOCLIMATOLOGY Current research in palaeoclimates and solar variation using tree ring dated C14 chronologies at the University of Arizona. The following C14 laboratories are currently presenting information on the WWW. All links and addresses are given in the WWW Sites page of the WEB-info server (http://www2.waikato.ac.nz/c14/webinfo/www.html). Again, if you know of any others not listed below, please contact me (email below): -Oxford University - Research Lab for Archaeology and Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (UK). -University of Waikato Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory (New Zealand). -Beta Analytic Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory (USA) -National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass Spectrometer Facility (NOSAMS - Woods Hole) (USA). -Purdue Rare Isotope Measurement Laboratory (PRIME Lab) (USA) -Queen's University of Belfast - Radiocarbon Laboratory (UK) -Centre for Isotope Research, Groningen (Netherlands) -Accelerator Mass Spectrometry - Australian National University (Australia) -Rafter Radiocarbon Laboratory (AMS) (New Zealand) -Center For Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (CAMS) Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (USA) -Erlangen AMS Group (Germany) (in German) -Arizona Accelerator Mass Spectrometer Group (AMS) (USA) -Heidelberg Radiocarbon Laboratory (Germany) -UC Riverside Radiocarbon Laboratory (USA) -Desert Research Institute Radiocarbon Laboratory (USA) -Washington State University Radiocarbon Laboratory (USA) Cheers, --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Thomas Higham, * Email: Thigham@waikato.ac.nz Research Officer-Archaeological Dating * Phone: +(64) 07 838 4278 Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, * GlobalFax: +(64) 7 838 4192 University of Waikato, * WWW: Radiocarbon WEB-info - Hamilton, * http://www2/waikato.ac.nz/c14/ NEW ZEALAND. * webinfo/index.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 10:04:22 +0800 Reply-To: Paul Weaver Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Paul Weaver Subject: Oldest Australian C14 date. In-Reply-To: For many years in Australia a cliche "40,000 years of Aborigiginal history" has been cited frequently to reinforce all manner of political arguments and claims in support of the indigenous peoples. In some quarters it is now fashionable to cite 60,000 years of Aboriginal history, and sometimes 100,000. These claims I believe are more based on hopeful hunches than scientific evidence. I think the 40,000 year claim originated in the early 1970s when there was no C14 date which could actually verify it. It happened at a time when Aboriginal people were emerging from a period of legal and social oppression, and undoubtedly obliged many non-Aboriginal people to reconsider their attitudes. Suddenly there was evidence of a culture which ranked amongst the most ancient on earth, and well beyong what Europeans ranked as ancient. The 40,000 year idea was contagious from the start. Indeed when I worked on one Western Australian dig, Devil's Lair, in the early 1970s as an excavator for Charles Dortch, a date of some 35,000 years was subsequently obtained. Personally I was awe struck and thought like I guess did many others, well if there is 35 k, why not 40 k, but it did not actually happen. I have recently looked at the Australian literature up to about six months ago and as as far as I can see there have been many C14 dates which are nudging up towards 40,000 years but I have not yet been able to discover any which yet actually crack that magic mark. There is however still plenty of speculation by respected archaeologists and antropologists that humans were present on the Australian continent prior to 40,000 years, and even as long as 100,000 years. Being an ethno-historian rather than an archaeologist I may be looking in the wrong places for a confirming date by any internationally recognised scientific method that human activity was taking place 40,000 years ago in Australia. Please forgive me if I am wrong on this. I would be very pleased if someone could confirm there are older scientific dates I can believe. Thanks in anticipation. Paul R. Weaver. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 11:24:11 -0500 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Thomas R Rocek Subject: Re: Oldest Australian C14 date. In-Reply-To: I'd love to have a C14 person and someone more knowledgable about Australian prehistory address this question in detail, but here is my understanding in brief: In general, most C14 samples simply can't be dated beyond roughly 35 or 40 thousand years because of the low levels of radiocarbon remaining in them. Thus most dates in that range are reported as minimum dates (greater than or equal to...) rather than as actual date determinations. Even when reported as actual date determinations, such samples are extremely sensitive to small sources of error, particularly minor contamination with recent carbon. I know that there are attempts to extend the effective dating range of C14 dating and that different labs give different estimates of the maximum. I have to admit that I have never understood the technical basis for exactly where the limits of the technique lie and how it is determined for particular samples (any C14 people out there willing to give a good explanation?), but that is the basic idea. The basis for arguing for greater antiquity for Australian materials include 1) the above view that many of the ca. 35 or 40 k dates either are or should be viewed as minimum dates, and 2) a series of thermoluminescence dates which purport to extend the record further. The Latter dates are based on a technique with a far shorter history of use, and hence more potential uncertainties than C14, so I don't think of them as clinching the argument (I also don't recall the context of the samples well enough to judge the reliability of their association with cultural material). A couple of fairly recent references: Allen, Jim 1994 Radiocarbon Determinations, Luminescence Dating and Australian Archaeology. _Antiquity_ 68:339-343. Roberts, Richard G., Rhys Jones, and M. A. Smith 1994 Beyond the Radiocarbon Barrier in Australian Prehistory. _Antiquity_ 68:611-616. Hope that is useful...Tom Rocek ************************************************************** * Tom Rocek * * Department of Anthropology Email: rocek@udel.edu * * University of Delaware Fax: (302) 831-4002 * * Newark, DE 19716 Voice: (302) 831-3695 * ************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 07:52:10 PST Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: "Dr. Robert M. Kalin" Subject: Re: Oldest C14 dates Dear Forum Members, In reply to a couple of messages on dating past 40K, here are a few recent publications. The problem with dating very old samples include: chemical blank, long times and stability of counting environment. Thermal enrichment has been used with some success over the last few decades, but given the time and effort, dating beyond 45K is usually not cost effective. I don't know if Arizona or Belfast is still attemptind dates beyond 45K - you can contact them and see. Best Regards Bob Kalin Long, A. and Kalin R.M. (1992) Use of liquid scintillation counting for radiocarbon dating in the 50,000 to 65,000 yr range: determination of chemical blank and fossil wood, Radiocarbon V34, no. 3, pp 351-359 Long, A. and Kalin, R.M. (1992) Radiocarbon dating of samples in the 50,000 to 65,000 ybp range without isotopic enrichment, in Rare Nuclear Processes, P. Povinec, ed, Proceedings of the 14th Europhysics Conference on Nuclear Physics 1990 , pp 256-263 McCormac, F.G., Kalin, R.M. and Long, A. (1993) Radiocarbon Dating Beyond 50,000 Years by Liquid Scintillation Counting, in J.E. Noakes, F. Schonhofer and H.A. Polach eds. Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry 1992, Radiocarbon, pp 125-133 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 08:42:11 -0700 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: David Sewell Subject: New cosmogenic isotope mailing list [I'm forwarding this notice at the request of Paul Bierman. For further information, please reply to him (pbierman@moose.uvm.edu), not to me. --DS] ===forwarded message follows==== Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 20:08:05 -0500 dsew@packrat.aml.arizona.edu From: pbierman@moose.uvm.edu (Paul Bierman) At the suggestion of those attending the Los Alamos cosmogenic isotope production rate conference, I have established a list-server for in situ produced cosmogenic nuclides including (for now) 3-He, 10-Be, 14-C, 21-Ne, 26-Al, 36-Cl, and 41-Ca. The list is entitled geocosmo and can be joined at listproc@list.uvm.edu (see instructions below). The purpose of this list is to allow both those of us in the community to communicate on an informal basis as well as to allow others with an interest in these nuclides to contact active practitioners. TO SEND A MESSAGE TO THE LIST USE THE ADDRESS BELOW ALONG WITH AN INFORMATIVE SUBJECT LINE... geocosmo@list.uvm.edu Just a one word of warning...for the last year, Andrea Lini has run a stable isotope list server (isogeochem) from UVM and more than once private messages have been broadcast to a crowd of over 560 people. Remember that if you reply to the list, all of us will be reading your mail! This list server is based at the University of Vermont. Please contact me if there are any problems. PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO ANYONE WHO MIGHT HAVE A COSMOGENIC INTEREST! Cheers! Paul Bierman pbierman@moose.uvm.edu UVM Geology (802) 656-4411 office Perkins Hall (802) 656-0045 fax Burlington, VT 05405 Geomorphology, Isotope Geology USA **********HOW TO SUBSCRIBE TO GEOCOSMO********** ++++++ Please save these instructions for future reference ++++++ In order to gain the benefit of this discussion list, you must subscribe to the list. For example, let's assume your name is Jeff Klein and you wish to join the cosmogenic isotope list. You would subscribe as follows.... Use the mail program on your computer to send an electronic mail message to this address: listproc@list.uvm.edu Leave the subject field blank. Construct a subscribe command as follows and place it as the first line of your message. Since the list name is geocosmo, this would be the first line of your message:: sub geocosmo Jeff Klein On the subscribe command you do not need to give your e-mail address (the system can figure this out). All you need to give is the list name and your name. If you wish to drop out of the discussion list at some time in the future, send an electronic mail message to: listproc@list.uvm.edu Leave the subject field blank. Include this line as the first line of your message: unsub geocosmo On the unsubscribe command you do not need to give your e-mail address (the system can figure this out) or your name. All you need is those two words. ------> A special note: <------- Some mailers allow you to append a signature line to the end of your message. Please turn off this feature when sending commands (like sub and unsub) to Listproc. Otherwise you will receive an error message. For example, with a signature line beginning: Jeff Klein, you will receive a message like: "Unrecognized request Jeff" The subscribe or unsubscribe command will work, but you will receive this error message, which you can discard. Also, if your mailer sends out a confirmation message after you have read an e-mail message, please turn this feature off when communicating to the list or to Listproc. The message it sends, like "confirmation of reading mail", is unnecessary and not recognized by the list or Listproc. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 11:15:51 -0600 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: James Burton Subject: SASnet mailing list SASnet, the mailing list for the Society for Archaeological Sciences, is now open to those who are not members of the S.A.S. It was set up to facilitate discussion about the applications of methods from the physical/natural sciences to archaeological problems. It's intended to provide a resource for archaeologists who need access to technical expertise and a forum for physical/natural scientists to discuss the development of archaeological applications of their methods. SASnet is a moderated list and, until now, has been a quiet one. I'm sure that some of the subscribers to C14-L have overlapping interests and wish to join. If so, send the following command: subscribe SASnet to: listservER@relay.doit.wisc.edu Questions about SASnet, or about the S.A.S., may be addressed to me, the list manager: J. Burton / Anthropology Dept. / Univ. Wisconsin-Madison ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 13:24:25 -0500 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Thomas R Rocek Subject: Oldest Australian C14 dates (fwd) As I think it might be of broader interest, I thought I would pass along this informative message from Esmee Webb. It addresses the Australian C14 date question posted a few weeks ago. Tom Rocek ************************************************************** * Tom Rocek * * Department of Anthropology Email: rocek@udel.edu * * University of Delaware Fax: (302) 831-4002 * * Newark, DE 19716 Voice: (302) 831-3695 * ************************************************************** ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:23:08 GMT From: UHFA026@alpha1.rhbnc.ac.uk To: rocek@udel.edu Subject: Oldest Australian C14 dates Dear Tom, A colleague passed weaver's original query and your reply on to me as an Australianist who writes on dating techniques. Your are quite right about 14C. The problem is that by 25k beta activity is down to less that 1 count per minute per gramme (cmg). Hence, it is very difficult to distinguish sample activity from background. Only a few labs: Seattle, Oxford, Groningen, eg, try. None of the labs to which Australian archaeologists do! As for luminescence. TL has been around for >20 years, you know. It's hardly a 'new' technique. OSL is newer, but well described by Aitken in Quat. Sci. Rev. 11 & 13. There is now a site, I'll grant you only one, in Arnhem Land where both TL & OSL has been done and the dates are concordant. They also parallel the TL dates from another site in the same region. They suggest that the oldest artefacts in both sites were deposited about 55-60K. A number of us have no problem with these numbers, but some people do because (a) they dont understand luminescence and (b) they are bothered by the large errors. The best ref. on this is QSR 13:575-583. The real problem is that a lot of people have difficulty believing that people could have been smart enough 60k to build rafts and reach Oz. Feel free to post this reply on the net if you want to. If you're really interested look for a paper of mine to come out in J Arch Sci fairly soon. I've also just sent one off to Antiquity. Esmee Webb Geography Department Royal Holloway University of London Egham TW20 0EX England ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 12:54:38 -0700 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Timothy Jull Subject: Re: Oldest Australian C14 dates (fwd) In-Reply-To: On Thu, 29 Feb 1996, Thomas R Rocek wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:23:08 GMT > From: UHFA026@alpha1.rhbnc.ac.uk > To: rocek@udel.edu > Subject: Oldest Australian C14 dates > > Your are quite right about 14C. The problem is that by 25k beta activity is > down to less that 1 count per minute per gramme (cmg). Hence, it is very > difficult to distinguish sample activity from background. Only a few labs: > Seattle, Oxford, Groningen, eg, try. None of the labs to which Australian > archaeologists do! Your comment applies to counting 14C, however, all counter labs have age limits of >40Kyr. AMS 14C laboratories have a similar limit using 0.1-0.5mg C. If you have problems with ages at 25Kyr, this is almost always a problem of sample contamination or lack of cleaning, and not a technical counting problem. To state otherwise shows a lack of knowledge of the subject. > As for luminescence. TL has been around for >20 years, you know. It's hardly > a 'new' technique. OSL is newer, but well described by Aitken in Quat. Sci. > Rev. 11 & 13. There is now a site, I'll grant you only one, in Arnhem Land > where both TL & OSL has been done and the dates are concordant. They also > parallel the TL dates from another site in the same region. They suggest that > the oldest artefacts in both sites were deposited about 55-60K. A number of > us have no problem with these numbers, but some people do because (a) they > dont understand luminescence and (b) they are bothered by the large errors. > The best ref. on this is QSR 13:575-583. To dismiss 14C and then to say TL is a better technique is highly questionable in my mind. Those of us who do understand TL also understand it is dependent on a number of variables, whereas at least 14C dating is dependent on only a few. TL dates except in a few isolated cases, perhaps including the one mentioned are often questionable. This is after all a C14 listserver. Thanks Tim Jull -------------------------------------------------------------- A. J. Timothy Jull tel. (520) 621-6816 NSF Arizona AMS Facility, fax. (520) 621-9619 Physics Building, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 University of Arizona AMS Lab Web-Page: http://www.physics.arizona.edu/ams/www1.html ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 10:25:11 +1300 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Alan Hogg Subject: Re: Oldest Australian C14 dates (fwd) >As I think it might be of broader interest, I thought I would pass along >this informative message from Esmee Webb. It addresses the Australian C14 >date question posted a few weeks ago. Tom Rocek > >************************************************************** >* Tom Rocek * >* Department of Anthropology Email: rocek@udel.edu * >* University of Delaware Fax: (302) 831-4002 * >* Newark, DE 19716 Voice: (302) 831-3695 * >************************************************************** > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:23:08 GMT >From: UHFA026@alpha1.rhbnc.ac.uk >To: rocek@udel.edu >Subject: Oldest Australian C14 dates > >Dear Tom, >A colleague passed weaver's original query and your reply on to me as an >Australianist who writes on dating techniques. >Your are quite right about 14C. The problem is that by 25k beta activity is >down to less that 1 count per minute per gramme (cmg). Hence, it is very >difficult to distinguish sample activity from background. Only a few labs: >Seattle, Oxford, Groningen, eg, try. None of the labs to which Australian >archaeologists do! We think that to say that 'only a few labs' try to distinguish sample from background activity is seriously in error. A sample is indistinguishable from background when its activity is within 2 sigma of the activity obtained from a sample which contains no C14. At 25 ka, as you say, radiocarbon activity is reduced, but 25 ka is much too young for a lab background, as a perusal of the IAEA and recent TIRI intercalibration will attest. If you are interested in recent work between labs at Belfast, Seattle, Toronto, Groningen, Waikato and Geol.Survey of Finland, a paper is due out in the Radiocarbon conference edition in a few weeks. This shows finite ages for NZ swamp kauri at 50-60 ka. The results below demonstrate that at least one of the labs (Waikato) that routinely date Australian material, can in fact distinguish sample activity from background up to _at least_ 50 000 years. Quaternary Isotope Lab (Seattle) (pMC = 0.147 +/- 0.012) Queen's University of Belfast (pMC = 0.208 +/- 0.012) University of Waikato (pMC = 0.224 +/- 0.013) Geological Survey of Finland (pMC = 0.196 +/- 0.021) Isotrace Laboratory at the University of Toronto (pMC = 0.216 +/- 0.015) Centrum voor Isotopen Onderzoek laboratory in Groningen (pMC = 0.099 +/- 0.017) >Stuff about TL deleted...> If you are looking for a reason why no labs have produced ages in excess of 35-40ka from Australian archaeological sites, its probably not likely to be due to an inability on the part of the C14 lab to handle old samples. Its probably more to do with sample preservation, sample sizes (which affect the amount of pretreatment able to be implemented), and inadequate pretreatment. Cheers, Alan Hogg and Tom Higham, --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Alan Hogg, | Email: AHogg@waikato.ac.nz Director, | Phone: +64 7 838 4278 Radiocarbon Dating Laboratory, | Fax: +64 7 838 4192 University of Waikato, | Home phone : +64 7 849 6139 Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, | World Wide Web server:- NEW ZEALAND. | http://www2.waikato.ac.nz/c14/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 18:02:32 -0500 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Thomas R Rocek Subject: Re: Oldest Australian C14 dates (fwd) In-Reply-To: <01I1TKG8GMTUASGHS8@waikato.ac.nz> Just a note to those replying to my message--first, I am delighted that it drew a response from several knowledgable folks. Please, note however, that I was merely passing along a message from Esmee Webb. I will pass the messages on to Esmee, and I also sent Esmee instructions for joining C14-l. Please do keep the useful information on this question coming! Tom Rocek ************************************************************** * Tom Rocek * * Department of Anthropology Email: rocek@udel.edu * * University of Delaware Fax: (302) 831-4002 * * Newark, DE 19716 Voice: (302) 831-3695 * ************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:04:39 -5600 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Walter Stewart Lorenz Bruechert Subject: Re: Oldest Australian C14 dates. In-Reply-To: from "Timothy Jull" at Feb 29, 96 12:54:38 pm Is there anyone out there who knows the oldest dates for Australian aboriginal rock art that depicts figurines using the spearthrower or is there a date for the oldest remains of a spearthrower fragment from Australia. If there is a reference that can be of help, I would certainly like to hear about it. Lorenz bruecher@sfu.ca ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 09:38:07 -0800 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Paul Weaver Subject: Re: Oldest Australian C14 dates In-Reply-To: Esmee Webb wrote on Australia's oldest dates: > The real problem is that a lot of people have difficulty believing that people > could have been smart enough 60k to build rafts and reach Oz. > Esmee Webb > Geography Department > Royal Holloway > University of London Well that may be the case in England, but not with me, nor any of the several other Australian archaeologists and anthropologists I know or have read. Indeed I cannot think of a single reference where anyone has indicated such a belief. Neither have I come across it in private conversations. I think it is generally accepted that people made a landfall on the continent by some sort of water craft The question is when. I have had a number of replies, both on the list, and privately. What is clear is that there is diversity of opinion on the reliability of C14 and that the limitations of the dating method have not yet been fully reached. I think most people would like to see Australian dates pushed back as far as possible, but the new benchmark needs to be more based upon scientific method, rather than politically based hunches. If methods such as TL produce dates of 55-60KA this is terrific. May there be more. Lets not forget we all had ancestors wandering about that long ago. Mine may be yours. Paul Weaver. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 20:07:34 -0700 Reply-To: Radiocarbon Mailing List Sender: Radiocarbon Mailing List From: Timothy Jull Subject: Re: Oldest Australian C14 dates In-Reply-To: > What is clear is that there is diversity of opinion on the reliability of > C14 and that the limitations of the dating method have not yet been fully > reached. The important thing I hope people who are not dating "experts" (and even they should too!) is that the date's reliability depends on what you dated. A 14C date on a nice piece of charcoal or something well-defined means a lot more than, say, a 14C date on a low-carbon sediment containing 1%C. In many such discussions, the nature of the material is forgotten. The problems with bone dating are a great example of this. 14C dating on good material is extremely reliable. 14C dating on junk is just that... > scientific method, rather than politically based hunches. If methods such > as TL produce dates of 55-60KA this is terrific. May there be more. Lets It is also important not to jump onto a new bandwaggon because it appears to give you the result you desire... There are lots of people in North America who want to see paleoindian dates >12,000 yr BP but there is practically no evidence for that. If you get a TL date, what is it on? This is the same problem as for 14C, is the material dated reliable? (This is not the same as criticizing the method) Tim Jull -------------------------------------------------------------- A. J. Timothy Jull tel. (520) 621-6816 NSF Arizona AMS Facility, fax. (520) 621-9619 Physics Building, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 University of Arizona AMS Lab Web-Page: http://www.physics.arizona.edu/ams/www1.html