Chapter 1475: Foreign Scholars Taking Quotes Out of Context
There are many questions about the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasty project, and there are six main ones.
The above mentioned three points. The fourth is that the "project" does not rely on the records of the Western Zhou Dynasty in "Jinben Zhushu Chronicle".
Many people do not agree to blindly conclude that it is a forgery, because the academic community has not yet reached a conclusion on its authenticity.
The fifth point is that the carbon-14 calculation program used by the "project" has only a 68.3% confidence level.
Sixth, the "project" measured carbon-14 in a Jinhou tomb and obtained several data with large gaps.
The "project" uses different data in different papers, which seems to have loopholes.
In addition, some overseas scholars have doubts about the academic ethics of "engineering".
The main issue here is the solar eclipse of King Zhou Yi in Zheng in 899 BC.
However, abroad, some people have already pointed out this solar eclipse and its significance to the Western Zhou Dynasty.
Some overseas scholars feel that the "Jianben" does not mention foreign academic achievements at all, which lacks certain academic ethics.
However, our domestic academic research needs to refer to foreign research? Is their research correct?
For example, through astronomical research, an American scholar determined the year when King Wu conquered Zhou as 1046 BC.
This academic theory was proposed in the early 1980s.
And our "Jianben" does not mention this at all.
Also, Dong Zuobin, an expert on oracle bone inscriptions, has long pointed out that "Tian Zaidan" is a solar eclipse that occurs at dawn, and set the year when this astronomical phenomenon occurred as 966 BC.
Later, Fang Shanzhu, a scholar from the Southern Dynasties, further pointed out in a paper published in 1975 that the date of 966 BC was incorrect and the correct date should be 899 BC.
As for the issue of "Tian Zai Dan", due to the limited space of the "Jianben", it is not possible to list the work of the predecessors one by one.
Also, the report by "Tian Zai Dan" is inappropriate.
Later, further introduction and explanation were provided on the background knowledge of carbon-14.
In addition, Neon's Kenji Ozawa also criticized the project for setting the year of King Wu's conquest of Zhou as 1046 BC instead of 1027 BC based on the "year of the year".
The reason is that the era when our country determined that the five stars of metal, wood, water, fire, and earth were the stars of year was during the Warring States Period. Therefore, it cannot be considered that the "year" in this sentence is Jupiter.
Don’t we know this? Don’t our experts know the Five Elements? Don’t they know when it started?
These people can think of things that we can’t think of?
The debate on April 12, 2003, was far more heated and effective than the previous two, and even had an astonishing climax.
Among the scholars who criticized "engineering", Jiang Zudi is especially interesting. You must know that he had some academic status in China at that time.
However, after going to Chou Country, his research became more interesting.
The most important content of "Chiang Wen" is the discussion of the "engineering" study of the era when "King Wu defeated Shang".
The author of "Jiang Wen" noticed that "Engineering" uses the oal series sample program.
He specifically asked Oxford University for this program, and used it to verify the few carbon-14 data published by "Project".
As a result, the age confidence range he calculated was much larger than the "fitting" data published in "Jianben".
….
"Jiang Wen" introduced that although the oal program series sample calculation method can obtain a narrow confidence interval, it is only 6@
"About 20 years" requirement.
Choosing a calculation method with a small confidence range can compress the age of King Wu's defeat of Zhou to within a few decades, thereby eliminating most of the 44 theories.
In other words, "engineering" would rather sacrifice the confidence of its methods in order to exclude more viewpoints.
"Jiang Wen" also pointed out that the serial sample calculation method of the OAL program based on "Engineering" does not represent the internationally recognized tree-ring correction method.
International carbon-14 experts have pointed out that the process of this algorithm contains artificially processed components, and the obtained age is not accurate.
The artificial component refers to the fact that carbon-14 experts need archaeological "series samples" provided by archaeological experts in their calculations.
That is, a group of archaeological samples with clear stages and an upper limit age and a lower age limit for each period.
It is difficult for archaeologists to provide such accurate samples, and reluctantly doing so would involve a lot of guesswork or man-made elements.
"Jiang Wen" takes the archaeological report of "Project" in Lixi as an example.
The "project" dating method names each cultural layer in Lixi after the kings of the Western Zhou Dynasty.
For example: the first period is "King Wen moved to Li until King Wu conquered Zhou", etc. This kind of dating method is called "interval".
The author of "Chiang Wen" himself presided over archaeological excavations in Lixi, and his report was published in 1992.
The dating method he used is called "gradual", which marks each cultural layer in a rough chronological range.
For example: the first period is the "first period".
The difference between the two is that the "interval method" requires each period to have clear upper and lower boundaries in specific years.
Adjacent periods must be disconnected from each other in time and cannot overlap;
The "gradual sequence method" does not have such a requirement and only marks the early, middle and late periods of the general dynasty.
"Chiang Wen" emphasizes that in Shang and Zhou archaeology, the "interval method" of "engineering" is very impractical.
Because the unearthed pottery, grains, wood and other items did not change with the new king's accession to the throne.
Furthermore, samples taken from a certain lower layer do not necessarily represent the age of this layer.
For example: the wood for the coffin may have been prepared in the past and was not cut down in the year of the deceased's death;
Therefore, its carbon-14 data cannot be regarded as the cultural layer to which it belongs.
The conclusion of "Chiang Wen" is that the creation of the so-called "multidisciplinary research" of "Project" mainly uses the study of non-literary evidence to solve the problem of the Western Zhou Dynasty.
[To be honest, I have been using @@ recently to read and catch up on updates, change sources, and read aloud with many different sounds. Available on Android and Apple.]
The division of archaeological strata, the staging of unearthed pottery, and the dating errors are based on hundreds of years of carbon-14 technology.
This is very helpful for prehistoric archeology, but cannot be applied to the study of Western chronology that requires specific chronological requirements.
From an academic perspective, "Chiang Wen"'s criticism of "projects" is well-founded and very objective.
The mistakes made in "engineering" are not based on an academic point of view, but on methods, which are fatal.
At the meeting, Jiang Zudi orally introduced the main points of his article to the participants.
Finally, he used the computer he brought with him and the OAI sequence program to re-check some carbon-14 data published by the "project" on the spot.
Since we are an opponent, the results are obviously different from those of the "project".