Originally Posted by CTD
Originally Posted by LinearAq
If extrapolation and indirect methodology are needed, does this automatically invalidate the results of the experiment? How so?
What you propose is indirect and incomplete, so the results would have to be extrapolated to produce a complete "curve".
Repeating what you have already said doesn't answer the question. WHY does using indirect and extrapolated information automatically invalidate the conclusions of an experiment?

You seem to be saying that if there is incomplete information that no reliable conclusions can be drawn.
I and all the forensic scientists disagree with you. In fact, all scientists probably disagree with you in this. No field of science has all the information in its area of study. However, conclusions and reliable predictions can be made.

Quote
If you had read your own link, you might have pieced this together.
The link simply says that extrapolation was used, it didn't say that using extrapolation was an invalid method for determining decay curves. You said that and I simply asked you why.

If you thought for just a few seconds you would realize that no scientist requires all possible information about a subject before making conclusions about that subject.

Quote
I also recall reading that obtaining measurements entails destroying samples, so it seems impractical to suggest measuring the same sample twice.
Obtaining the ratio of parent to daughter isotope ratios doesn't require destroying all of the sample even for C-14 dating.

A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke