If carbon dating wrong
(Carbon dating is already limited in scope because older artifacts have to be dated using other methods.For instance, Lucy, the 3.2-million-year-old human ancestor, was dated by scientists who studied the volcanic flows and ashes in deposits where her bones were found.)“Given current emissions trends, fossil fuel emission-driven artificial ‘aging’ of the atmosphere is likely to occur much faster and with a larger magnitude than previously expected,” Graven wrote.Since the 1940s, scientists have used carbon dating to determine the age of fossils, identify vintages of wine and whiskey, and explore other organic artifacts like wood and ivory.The technique involves comparing the level of one kind of carbon atom—one that decays over time—with the level of another, more stable kind of carbon atom.After all, this what the archeologist guessed in their published books.Some believe trees are known to be as old as 9,000 years. A lot of people doubt this claim for various good reasons I wont go into here.By the year 2100, the atmosphere will have a radiocarbon age of 2,000 years old. If Graven's calculations are correct, carbon dating as we know it today will no longer be reliable by the year 2030.
Once they did that they developed the overall sequence.
If you have any more questions about it don't hesitate to write.
(2.) I just listened to a series of lectures on archaeology put out by John Hopkins Univ.
“Seldom has a single discovery in chemistry had such an impact on the thinking in so many fields of human endeavour,” one of Libby's colleagues wrote at the time, according to the Nobel Foundation.
Today, carbon dating is used so widely as to be taken for granted.