Correction to "Re: Last Word (from me) on the Crackpot Theory, I Think..."

Paul bristolia at yahoo.com
Tue Nov 1 12:32:57 EST 2005

In my last post at
http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/meteorite-list/2005-November/178653.html ,
my thinking and argument drifted from TL dating to OSL dating.
My paragraph concerning the TL dating should have read:

"One significant problem here is that thermoluminescent dating
presumes a steady level of radiation damage over time by the
decay of radioactive elements trapped in the chert. Irradiation
strong enough to have altered the isotopic composition of the
uranium in chert would have also caused extensive radiation
damage to the microcrystalline quartz composing the chert.
Therefore, had what Firestone and his colleagues claimed to
have occurred, actually happened, any thermoluminescent
dates from the effected site should have also been altered to
the point of providing apparent dates considerably older than
the associated Paleo-Indian artifacts. The fact, that the
thermoluminescent dates are only slightly older, which is
common due to incomplete thermal resetting of the chert,
than age of the culture affiliated with the Paleo-Indian
artifacts, strongly refutes the idea that these sites were
irradiated at all. Had these sites been irradiated as much as
proposed by Firestone, then the ages given by the
thermoluminescent dates would have given apparent dates
significantly older than the artifacts actually are, which was
not the case."

I apologize for this brain fart.

Best Regards,

Paul