Even radiocarbon dating used for dates over 65,000 years, have a relatively
wide error factor.
Not exact matches
If you
factor the
error margins in, that's a
wide range!
I concede that the
error bands are so
wide and uncertainty so great that any of several
factors could be predominant, including co2, although for many reasons I doubt that.
SI reports too often focus on individual staff failings without considering the
wider organisational and / or environmental
factors that enabled the
error to occur, limiting learning and the opportunity to prevent future harm.