This observation from your wiki link
should be shoved up the ass of every jesus-freak creatard, too!
Quote:While Fomenko rejects commonly accepted dating methods, archaeologists, conservators and other scientists make extensive use of such techniques which have been rigorously examined and refined during decades of use.[45] While it is known that radiometric dating methods can only provide approximate dates (see also this discussion of radiocarbon dating), the uncertainty associated with each method is known and limited. When several dating methods are used in conjunction, they usually converge to produce similar ages for objects from the same layer of a given archaeological site. Independent scientific absolute dating methods include thermoluminescence dating, optically stimulated luminescence dating, archaeomagnetic dating, and in some cases palaeoentomology, as well as relative dating techniques, relying on stratigraphy or the seriation of different artifact types.
In the specific case of dendrochronology, Fomenko claims that this fails as an absolute dating method because of gaps in the record. However, independent dendrochronological sequences beginning with living trees from various parts of North America[46][47] and Europe[48][49] extend back 12,400 years into the past. Furthermore, the mutual consistency of these independent dendrochronological sequences has been confirmed by comparing their radiocarbon and dendrochronological ages.[50] These and other data have provided a calibration curve for radiocarbon dating whose internal error does not exceed ±163 years over the entire 26,000 years of the curve.[51]
In fact, archaeologists have developed a fully anchored dendrochronology series going back past 10,000 BCE.[52] "The absolutely dated tree-ring chronology now extends back to 12,410 cal BP (10,461 BC)."
should be shoved up the ass of every jesus-freak creatard, too!
