More likely that they were destroyed at the same time as the mammoths were, about 5,000 years ago.
They were covered by the rapid freezing and formation of these glaciers during the eruption of the fountains of the deep.
Woolly mammoths were not Arctic elephants. They are simply hairy elephants, not fury elephants, and elephants simply cannot survive in an Arctic environment.
Woolly mammoths are always found with lush tropical vegetation and other animals like Rhino's. This shows that the ice and rapid freezing came on suddenly, and fast froze these animals, often in their tracks with food still in their mouths. They are often so well preserved that the meat is still fresh.
See the studies of these interesting finds, which turns evolution theory upside down.
Woolly mammoths were not Arctic elephants. They are simply hairy elephants, not fury elephants, and elephants simply cannot survive in an Arctic environment.I wholeheartedly agree.
Makes sense. Arctic animals are usually not large, well with the exception of polar bears. Most Arctic animals are small like ptarmigans.
I have to agree, all arctic animals have dense, oily fur. The region could not have been frozen if any bare skin was exposed. Just another of the thousands of cases of evidence presented as favoring evolution that in reality demolishes it.
I bet you hava a whole closet full of tinfoil hats.
Solzhenitsyn has another take on how hunger can alter one's perception of freshness.
IIRC, there was a big society dinner nearly a hundred years ago in which mammoth was served.