carbon dates are not reliable near running water

Carbon dates not reliable

Carbon dates assume a constant rate of decay of carbon 14 back into more stable carbon 12.  But this does not apply if there is a source of X ray radiation.  Which massively shortens the carbon date!

Making artifacts barrier to within living memory, carbon dates of thousands of years ago.  The turbulent flow of water does molecular nuclear fusion.  Science which was devised at Sheffield University 2000.

1 ⁱ⁴C+X-ray→ⁱ²C in a very quick time.

With no source of external X rays, carbon 14 has a significant half life.  The time taken for half the carbon 14 to decay into carbon 12.

5,730 years

The time it takes for ⁱ⁴C to radioactively decay is described by its half-life. C has a half-life of 5,730 years. In other words, after 5,730 years, only half of the original amount of ⁱ⁴C remains in a sample of organic material. After an additional 5,730 years–or 11,460 years total–only a quarter of the 14C remains.

But if we have a peat bog, or the turn in a deep river the apparent half-life is just 50 years.

So the TV programme 'digging for Britain' show the archaeological remains of a tree bark shield.  Which should normally decay within a century.  That carbon dated to her 1000 years ago air.  To 800 PC.  But it was in a river.  So the carbon date he is not reliable.

We need alert datable artifacts - like coins or writing.  Which makes the past and or more boring!  As is no I technology staff being made.  They were modern artefacts, there is no source of X rays like a fast running river.

2 H₂O+P+TU→He↑+O↑+E²+X-ray

We could use force rays radioactive dating, as radioactive plasma is as a half-life of 10,000 years.  But it is equally susceptible to modern sources of X rays.

I have a master's degree in engineering and metallurgy, for Sheffield University.  Specializing in radioactivity.