Radiocarbon dating, often called C-14 dating, is something we usually hear about when discussing archaeology and fossils. It uses specialized, sensitive lab equipment to detect tiny traces of specific atoms in a minute sample.
It's also the test that's revealed most 19th century whiskey “relics” to be recently made counterfeits.
Forgers fill their fakes with modern whiskeys. The “smartest” fakers will use a moderately expensive whiskey with some age on it, like 10-20 years. The idea is that even if the bottle is opened, the fake contents still might fool the taster’s senses. But most of these scumbags don't even care what's in their fakes -- because if the bottle is ever opened and tasted, by then the faker is long gone.
A 1 ml sample was extracted and sent to Prof. Gordon Cook's radiocarbon accelerator unit at the University of Glasgow. His lab is reknowned for its experience dating rare spirits -- and fake ones.
Importantly, the Baker's sample was submitted as one of three blind whiskey samples. The other two were "controls" distilled in 1960 and about 2004. But the lab didn't know that -- they simply received samples labeled X, Y, and Z, all to be tested for supposed 19th century distillation.
"Y" was the Baker's. Two months later, Prof. Cook issued a detailed report which concluded:
While these results may sound imprecise, in the small niche where whiskey meets particle accelerators, they are ideal. And, the two control samples were correctly identified as being from their respective time periods.
A second 1 ml sample was sent to a different radiocarbon accelerator unit at a presitigous university in England (which we can't name). That lab independently replicated Prof. Cook's results, also under the same blind and controlled protocol. Neither lab knew about the other's involvement.
After years of painstaking research, a tiny carbon atom was the giant cherry atop an authentic World's Oldest Whiskey sundae.
As of April 2021, Skinner auctioneers in Boston is trying to sell a bottle of "Old Ingledew" whiskey that they claim dates from the 1700s, based on a carbon dating test.
In short, Skinner's claim exemplifies "junk science" and how not
to use C14 results. Their "research" is so scientifcally irresponsible and academically ignorant as to be absurd. In pursuit of profits it's detestable. For those interested in details, please contact us