My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE134254
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE134254
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:34:57 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 2:03:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
TAB 05F APPENDIX 5F-1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br />Arthur C. Townsend <br />April 28, 1981 <br />Page Three <br />6734 + 7258 + 89 <br />2 <br />= 6996 t 63 BP (5046 ± 141 BC). <br />To test the contemporaneity of the two dates, I can use the following <br />formula advocated by Long and Rlppeteau: <br />s 2 = n~(Ci)2 - (~Ci)2 <br />n n2(n-1) <br />where, <br />s 2 = variance of the mean of each date's mean <br />C. =each individual date <br />r1 <br />U <br />An F-test, specified below, can be used then to evalua~e the signifi- <br />cance of any difference between the sample variance (s) and the <br />population variance (~ ): <br />F = s 2/n <br />~ 2 <br />where <br />6 2 = 1 <br />X12 + ~ + ... + Q 2 <br />1 2 n <br />Using the corrected dates from Table 1, a value of F = 3.4322 is <br />obtained which, with ~ (n ) and n-1 (n ) degrees of freedom, is less <br />than the desired value of 23 .84 for [helrejection of the null hypothe- <br />sis at ~ _ .05. Therefore, the variances expressed in the two radio- <br />carbon dates from 5RT139 are not significantly different from an <br />expected population variance and the two dates are essentially <br />contemporaneous. <br />On the basis of these results, I believe that my assignment <br />to the Early Archaic period for the occupation of 5RT139 has been <br />• strengthened. I admit the possibility of multiple occupation <br />(Palen-Indian, and maybe Late Prehistoric on the basis of the 1130 BP <br />date) but no firm evidence for an earlier or later occupation exists <br />at this time. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.