Talk:King Clone

11.700 Years old

11.700 Years counted back from which Year? I already know this story about maybe 10 Years and in this times I also had read "11.700 Years" but now it is about 10 Years later and so it should be 11.710 Years - or? It would be great including the "Basic-Year" into the Article. Please forgive me my bad english -- Hartmann Schedel ^Prost 09:38, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

and now I have some more: I was searching now maybe 2 or 3 hours via Google for some Dates: when did Jim Cornett make his "famous Flight" on which he discovered (do you say so in english?) this King Creosote? All I had found out is, that it must be somewhen "in the late 70s" and that Frank Vasek do his researchs about the Age probably in 1980 (uff, I hope this is understandable in english). -- Hartmann Schedel ^Prost 18:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The age of this is not exact. From the article, it "is estimated to be 11,700 years old". When you're talking about 11,700 years, one can't simply pinpoint a specific age. The creosote bush overview mentions that it is carbon dated. I'm sure you can read up on carbon dating and get an idea of the acceptable ranges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.166.15.114 (talk) 01:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

oh sure I know enough about the C14 to know, it is not working exactly (even if I don't know much about it) - by the way: do someone know if the 11.700 years are calibrated or just C14-Years? However in 100 Years it must be estimated 11.800 Years old (for example). Ok lets get the Question the other way around: do someone know when the C14-Measuring was made? And still I would be glad to know, when Jim Cornett made his flight -- Hartmann Schedel ^Prost 15:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

this could maybe be helpful for listing in external websites -- Hartmann Schedel ^Prost 15:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, for this kind of measurement, I read "approximately 11,700 years before radiocarbon present" for "11,700 years old." Radiocarbon present is set by convention at A.D. 1950. I'm not sure that is what is meant in this case, but I would guess it is. It could definitely be cleared up by someone familiar with Dr. Vasek's research. TCSaint (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pando

The article on the Pando_(tree) claims the tree is "oldest known living organisms" in apparent contradiction to this article Ucanlookitup (talk) 03:27, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]