Bob Porter reports on gaps in the Belfast Chronology in a recent article authored by Mike Baillie and D Brown, 'Confirming the existence of gaps and depletions in the Irish oak tree ring record' in Dendrochronologia 30 (2012) pages 85-91. The aim of the article was to show that over the last 20 to 30 years some these gaps have been bridged – but not entirely so. Some of the bridging is not perhaps as firm as they would have wished. Anomalies still exist. Trees, that should bridge them do not. This is not necessarily disastrous as far as dendrochronologists are concerned as trees are affected by various factors – and local conditions.
Bob Porter then goes into some detail at NewChronology [at] yahoogroups [dot] com and pinpoints a gap in the 10th century BC and another in the first century BC. See also the Cybis website (of the Larsons). Bob Porter concludes that the only two long dendrochronologies going back into BC, which have released their data, that of Belfast, and that of Hollstein (the 1980 German oak dendrochronology) have been found to be 'highly questionable (Belfast) and definitely in error (Hollstein). Might dendrochronology eventually be found to be in error, too snugly glued to the C14 calibration curve (for better or worse). Interesting times.
Once again we have a consensus theory, solid as hard can be, displaying a bit of a wobble when subject to neutral investigation (this time by the Larsons). See www.cybis.se