The periodic tale of the elements has been around a LONG time. It makes sense that our first conceptions about the elements would be wrong. Since technology has improved over the last few decades, I can see where things might need to be updated.
Actually there is nothing "wrong" with the Periodic Table as it presently exists.......it was established in the manner that it is in order to compare elemental states at as closely as possible to common abilities to react with other elements/compounds. New elements have been added on a more or less continuous basis over the past century, however they must meet a specific set of standards in order to be included. There is a SPECIFIC reason for excluding isotopic ranges........they simply do not react in common terms with other elements, hell, some have a "half-life" of only seconds, if that much.
Further, it is not as though we have not known about isotopic forms of various elements for decades, if not centuries. Whether they exist in nature is irrelevant.......
Reading the article (and reading between the lines) it appears that this effort is the result of someone attempting to use the data on the table under some archaic rules of evidence in court cases involving the chemistry surrounding human drug analysis. The Periodic Table is a teaching aid, not a "courtroom prop". and it really pisses me off when groups attempt to alter the realities of scientific fact to suit some other agenda.
This is "slow news day" hogwash........
doc
