Radiocarbon dating fairbanks
Given the scans in question are CT scans you would rightly expect that the following examples are CT scans gone wrong.
I’m somewhat skeptical that describing a CT scan as high-tech is part of some brainwashing campaign.
Regardless, I am very skeptical of the validity of the claim given that the first radiocarbon dates were published in December 1949, 3 months after radiocarbon had allegedly given conflicting results on the age of this mammoth. “The two Colorado Creek, AK mammoths had radiocarbon ages of 22,850 plus or minus 670 and 16,150 plus or minus 230 years respectively.” Robert M. Dale Guthrie, “Stratigraphy of the Colorado Creek Mammoth Locality, Alaska.” Quaternary Research, Vol. Two mammoths were found and shown to be from different times. The use of this example as a refutation of radiocarbon becomes especially puzzling when one checks the reference given and finds they were from different stratigraphic units.
In other words, two mammoths from different layers dated differently.
No part of the article goes “one part of the Vollosovitch mammoth…”, it’s all a table.
Secondly, none of the radiocarbon dates for mammoths given in that table are 44,000 or 29,500.
First, the information on mammoth dates is presented in a table.