1 posted on
01/17/2006 10:40:52 PM PST by
SunkenCiv
2 posted on
01/17/2006 10:42:58 PM PST by
SunkenCiv
(In the long run, there is only the short run.)
To: blam; FairOpinion; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; vannrox
3 posted on
01/17/2006 10:43:23 PM PST by
SunkenCiv
(In the long run, there is only the short run.)
a future winner of the Nobel Prize:
Retracing the footprints of time
by Steve Sandford
September 9, 1996
web archive version
Direct radiocarbon dating of the Calgary site is not possible because the ancient artifacts were not found in conjunction with organic matter, such as bones or decayed plant matter, which is necessary for such testing. Absent such verification, Prof. Young dismisses the find. For one thing, he says, the artifacts are so simple they could merely be naturally-occurring rocks; he says that most informed scientists are doubtful they are tools. And even if they are tools, he adds that there is no way to be sure that they were originally situated where they were found under the gravel, since the site has served as an exposed gravel pit for the last 100 years. Comments Prof. Young: "Any dude could have put that rock there."
4 posted on
01/19/2006 10:54:29 PM PST by
SunkenCiv
(In the long run, there is only the short run.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson