35,000 year old "modern human" remains Discovered!

Yahoo News ^ | Sat Mar 6,11:27 AM ET | By ALISON MUTLER, Associated Press Writer

[DannyTN]

Are you sure she's the same species?

[Tricorn]

What they don't want you to know is that these particular people had evolved from bacteria brought to earth from Mars by a meteor back when Mars was all watery. (That and the fact that they also voted for Gore in 2000.)

[Just mythoughts]

?"Romanian recreational cavers unearthed the remains of three facial bones last year, and gave them to Romanian scientists.

Romanian scientists asked Trinkaus to analyze the fossils, and he traveled to the Romanian city of Cluj this week with Portuguese scientist Joao Zilhao, a fossil specialist.

Trinkaus said a jawbone belonged to a man aged about 35. He said part of a skull and remains of a face including teeth belonged to a 14- to 15-year-old male and a temporal bone to a woman of unspecified age.



"This was 25,000 years before agriculture. Certainly they were hunters," said Trinkaus. He said the bones were discovered in the foothills of the Carpathian Mountains"?


So who drug the THREE separate bones in that cave. I have no reason yet to dispute the age, however, making claims on three different bones coming from three different human beings, is very suspect. It sure is going to take a lot of ART work to give these bones a face and body.

[DannyTN]

The following article talks about advances in carbon dating that completely undermine the long ages evolutionists have been coming up with.

Carbon Dating undercuts evolutionist's long ages

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Radio Carbon dating is notoriously inaccurate, so most scientists use nearby fossils. The fossils dates are changed to fit evolutionary thinking. So the dates of this find will vary widely over time.

So who is to say these remains weren't previously spelunkers from say 2000 years ago.

[ThinkPlease]

I'll see your link, and raise you another link. Index of Creationist Claims

[balrog666]

modern humans of that era..."

Found in a slurry of ancient cave bear dung.

[uncbuck]

There goes my breakfast....Arggghhh...

Thanks.

Have you ever tasted oatmeal...twice chewed?

[uncbuck]

Please don't insult us neanderthals.

No self respecting neanderthal would club that over the head and drag it back to the cave. No matter how hungry he was.

[Prodigal Son]

Article's actual title:

Anthropologists Hail Romania Fossil Find

[LiteKeeper]

YEC INTREP - ANTHROPOLOGY

[sr4402]

So who is to say these remains weren't previously spelunkers from say 2000 years ago.

Good question. Exactly what is the evidence here? Too many don't use critical thinking anymore and get suckered in to believing what the press or other scientist is foisting upon us.

Theory without data = Presupposition.

[DannyTN]

I see your link.

Between ICR's finding and the evolutionists response that contamination is common, it certainly undermines much of the credibiliity of carbon dating.

One begins to wonder whether any of the carbon dating is accurate. If old fossils can be contaiminated, then surely new fossils can be contaminated. How many other radiometric dating methods suffer from similar problems?

[sr4402]

I don't know where you get this from. I've always thought that carbon dating, calibrated in recent years using dendrochronology, is the standard for dating organic remains less than 40,000 to 50,000 YBP. Other index fossils are important, but how do you suppose those were dated to begin with? Carbon, of course.

Radio Carbon dating, has a presupposition that the radio-carbon was originally an initial value and was undisturbed over time. Mineral leaching can affect the dates widely. So many dates have been off, that scientist look for outside clues.

My point is that I have no frame of reference, in this article, on what the date was based on. Without that frame of reference, why should I believe this author?

[PatrickHenry]

Romania ping.

[ASA Vet]

The Banat Plain is in Timis and Caras Counties on the opposite side
of the mountain from the Black Sea regional flooding of ca 5600 BCE.

[DannyTN]

"No self respecting neanderthal would club that over the head and drag it back to the cave. No matter how hungry he was."

Yes the Nastasaurus makes for very foul eating. Researchers think the male nastasaurus was both blind and deaf.

[Right Wing Professor]

The following article talks about advances in carbon dating that completely undermine the long ages evolutionists have been coming up with.

Not really. They find tiny levels of ¹⁴C in very old coals. All that means is that, in addition to the atmospheric source, there is a mechanism for producing very low levels of ¹⁴C within the earth - likely irradiation by exogenous radioactive sources.

As Baumgardner admits, even if you claimed a common age for all the coals, based on the ¹⁴C content, and said that was the age of the Genesis flood, you'd come up with an age of 50,000 years. So he then has to introduce the ad hoc assumption of 'accelerated nuclear decay', for which there is no plausible physical mechanism, to make it consistent with Genesis.

[uncbuck]

They apparantly had no touch receptors as well.

[ThinkPlease]

One begins to wonder whether any of the carbon dating is accurate. If old fossils can be contaiminated, then surely new fossils can be contaminated. How many other radiometric dating methods suffer from similar problems?

That's why science has something called error bars, to determine confidence.

Also, it's good to remember that the levels that Baumgardner measures are trace amounts...corresponding to levels at the very upper time ranges of C14 dating, where people will be using other dating techniques primarily anyway, and simply using C14 as a guide to make sure that ages match with multiple techniques.

Few scientists are dumb enough to just use one technique, when there are many techniques available to get an answer. Any age given in a scientific paper is likely run through a battery of multiple tests to get it's age. Indeed, that's what a scientific paper is supposed to do....give you a detailed list of experiments done to get from the author's assumptions to their conclusion. A recipe, in essence for others to follow if they wish to replicate (and verify) the author's work. Included in that recipe is every technique the author used to verify his assumptions rigorously, lest he is called to the carpet for shoddy work.

Baumgardner isn't presenting anything earthshattering in his paper...he's just discovered something that other scientists have known for quite some time, and trying to use it for his own purposes...being specifically untruthful in that he should know damn well how other scientists do date analyses. Silly creationists.