'A Causality Problem For Milankovitch' is the title of this report, which challenges the insolation theory with reference to a cave in Nevada called Devils Hole. The penultimate termination of the ice age at 135 ka seems incompatible with the new data in 1992. The Devils Hole chronology was based on U-Th dating and then replicated with Uranium-Protactinium dating. But I suggest that it should be considered that orbital eccentricity affects the relative abundance of radioelements in the atmosphere and ocean. If this is so, then the discrepancy can be reduced or eliminated. Here is an wikipedia explanation for radiocarbon calibration: "A raw BP date cannot be used directly as a calendar date, because the level of atmospheric 14C has not been strictly constant during the span of time that can be radiocarbon dated. The level is affected by variations in the cosmic ray intensity which is in turn affected by variations in the earth's magnetosphere. In addition, there are substantial reservoirs of carbon in organic matter, the ocean, ocean sediments (see methane hydrate), and sedimentary rocks. Changes in the Earth's climate can affect the carbon flows between these reservoirs and the atmosphere, leading to changes in the atmosphere's 14C fraction." If orbital eccentricity affects the magnetosphere, then the calibration for atmospheric radioelements would need to be adjusted. This could potentially solve a lot of problems with dating anomalies. This article (Dec 18, 2008) highlights my viewpoint with regard to carbon-dating. How long before questions are asked about the accuracy of U-Th dating?