Talk: Pleistocene
From open-encyclopedia.com - the free encyclopedia.
The arithmetic for the length of the Pliocene in previous paragraph doesn't seem quite right. I think a 2000 year correction to the end of the period has morphed into a 200,000 year shift in the beginning, but maybe I'm missing something. ... And Radiocarbon dating in only good for about 100,000 years? Won't cover the whole Pleistocene, right? So 11,000 is a radiocarbon date, but 1.6 or 1.8 million isn't? Right?
But I try not to rewrite things that might be correct. Is a clarification or correction needed?
The current versions of the dates are mine: but this was my "best guess" after examining several web sites, which were unclear and/or disagreed with each other. What you write about limits on radiocarbon dating had puzzled me at the time, I'd guessed some other kind radiometric dating was indended for the earlier dates, but then the 10% or so radiocarbon calibration is irrelevant. However I've seen the 1.6 million vs 1.8 million elsewhere. Please clarify and correct if you know any better, ideally with an authoritive reference if such a thing exists -- Hagedis
---
The start date depends on the dating of marine clays at the Global Stratotype Section and Point at Vrica in Italy. As best I can determine, the ambiguity in the date there is in fact about 200,000 years. Try a search on GSSP and Vrica. Maybe you can make more sense out of the papers on the subject than I could. They seem to me to be somewhat long on jargon and a bit short on content. DJK
If you're happy with 1.8-1.6 for the start of the Pleistocene, just delete this /Talk.
