4 ms·

Carbon dating would work?

• Olap84 10y ago
  Simples, market it as 1946 honey, no carbon dating after that! 70 year old honey coming at you
  • lozf 10y ago
    It's not old, it's "mature".
  • whamlastxmas 10y ago
    Why 70 years, or why 1946? Tried Googling but didn't see answer. I had thought carbon dating was pretty inaccurate anyways, didn't think it worked on such small time scales. Maybe this is a joke that went over my head.
    • mpitt 10y ago
      I think it refers to the background radiation increase due to atomic bombs, see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel Edit: a nice plot https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Radiocarbon_bomb_spike.svg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Radiocarbon_bomb_spi...
      • ascorbic 10y ago
        When archaeologists give a date in years Before Present (BP), they measure from 1st January 1950. I guess that makes today -66BP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_Present https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_Present
      • whamlastxmas 10y ago
        I wouldn't have guess such small amounts of radiation in the atmosphere would interfere with carbon dating, but I know literally nothing about how it works. Seems like solar radiation and such would be a bigger contributor?
    • philjohn 10y ago
      Dawn of the nuclear age IIRC.