|Public domain image. SOURCE.|
To get accurate dates, samples are taken from living trees, old timbers in buildings, archaeological sites, and/or peat bogs, and they are graphed by a computer. Samples with unknown dates are brought up against reference chronologies and their ring patterns compared. The age of some trees (Bristlecone pines can live up to 9,000 years) allow scientists to create records of the region from which they originated; the International Tree-Ring Data Bank (headed by the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration, or NOAA) has collected a database of such samples and the Sheffield Dendrochronology Lab has a tree ring record that stretches as far back as 5,000 BCE, with over 200 reference chronologies.
|Bristlecone pines. Public domain image. SOURCE.|
That use of the past to possibly predict the future ties in with the Uniformitarian Principle, which says physical and biological processes that are linked to current environmental processes and tree growth must have occurred in the past as well. There are six other principles: The Principle of Limiting Factors, the Principle of Aggregate Tree Growth, the Principle of Ecological Amplitude, the Principle of Site Selection, the Principle of Crossdating, and the Principle of Replication (for detailed definitions, go HERE).
Another way dendrochronology is used is in the dating of paintings.
Michael Stambaugh is a Research Assistant Professor at the University of Missouri. His research focuses on forest ecosystems, including tree growth responses to climate change, reconstruction of paleoclimates and paleoenvironments, and changes in vegetation and fire regimes (fire regimes are the frequencies that bushfires occur).
Video with Michael Staumbaugh:
Plant a Wish Moment: Dr. Mike Stambaugh of Missouri Tree Ring Lab Talks about his Research from Noni Films on Vimeo.
And now for the Insecure Writer's Support Group part of my post.
Since I've been writing about science this month, I've been thinking.
Personally, I love technicality in fiction. I love Hard Science Fiction because it often provides explanations of how stuff works and the theories the technology is based on; and I suppose that's another reason why Steampunk appeals me so much, with all those gears and machines and blend between society and science.
But since I know a lot of people don't like that kind of thing, I gather a balance must be struck between explaining how a technical world works and not pushing the reader away. I try to treat such information like backstory and world-building--explain it as dynamically as possible, through dialogue and only when necessary. Boring the reader to death with ruminations on faster-than-light (FTL) travel or other such elements is not the goal, great as my urge may be to yammer away about it.
How much technicality do you put into your writing, and how do you handle it? How much do you tolerate when you read fiction, and do detailed explanations make you skim or put down a story?
-----The Golden Eagle