Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: JoeProBono
The fossil footprint.

Homo maybe but modern NO. Humans in flesh did not exist during this time period.

4 posted on 02/26/2009 12:12:27 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Just mythoughts

If they were advanced, you can bet they didn’t find the footprints in Washington.


6 posted on 02/26/2009 12:20:39 PM PST by Oldpuppymax (AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Just mythoughts
Homo maybe but modern NO. Humans in flesh did not exist during this time period.

If there were indisputable means of dating a footprint that looked entirely like a modern human footprint at 1.5 millions years, you would devise some reason the results couldn't be accepted because of your preexisting assumptions of what could or could not have been making prints at that time.
22 posted on 02/26/2009 8:35:12 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Just mythoughts

[ummm, “Homo” means “Man”]


25 posted on 02/26/2009 9:52:12 PM PST by null and void (We are now in day 37 of our national holiday from reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson