Carbon-14 in Diamonds: The UCI Data

Paul Giem Loma Linda, California

Graphite Versus Phanerozoic Carbon

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Graphite Range Mass Spec C Coal Petroleum Foraminifera Wood Other Upper C. L. Lower C. L.

The RATE Group

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

TX ND MT UT UT AZ

KY PA PA IL

Eocene (40 Ma)

Cretaceous (100 Ma)

Pennsylvanian (350 Ma)

Other data
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Graphite Range Mass Spec C Coal Petroleum Foraminifera Wood Other Upper C. L. Lower C. L.

The RATE Group

Dated diamond (Precambrian) Appears to be above background

0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0

The UCI Diamond Data

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Graphite Range Mass Spec C Diamonds Upper C. L. Lower C. L.

The UCI Diamond Data

0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Graphite Range Mass Spec C Diamonds Upper C. L. Lower C. L.

The UCI Diamond Data

0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Graphite Diamonds Upper C. L. Lower C. L.

The UCI Diamond Data in Chronological Order

0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Graphite Diamonds Upper C. L. Lower C. L.

UCIAMS-15442? UCIAMS-14440?

Implications of The UCI Diamond Data

The

data argue that some diamonds have very low 14C concentrations They are consistent with the hypothesis that contamination contributes to observed background They argue that there are differences of carbon-14 concentrations in diamonds.

Implications of The UCI Diamond Data

Diamond 9639 is 9.35 standard deviations from the mean of Diamond 12674-12679
That is not the proper test

Grubbs testing gives G1=2.1958

95th percentile is 1.938 for 7 samples (0.0115) 99th percentile is 2.097 (0.0092) 100th percentile is 2.2678

Grubbs testing on Diamond 9640 gives 2.182

Authors Comments
At this time, it is not clear to us what factors might be involved in the greater variability in the apparent 14C concentrations exhibited in individual diamonds (Section B) as opposed to splits from a single natural diamond (Section A). Possible factors suggested to us are greater variability in the orientation of the crystal facies and microfractures in individual diamonds. Note the absence of the possibility of differences in actual 14C content due to residual activity.

Summary
The

data indicate that there is residual carbon in at least some diamonds This indication is getting stronger with time
Residual carbon requires a short age It destroys the standard geological timescale
Long-agers

are unlikely to concede this fact If I have to argue, I prefer that the data support my argument

The End
Now its Erv Taylors turn