Mexican footprints cause scientific stir

And so the question is again asked: were the Indians present at the time of Columbus the same as the ones who left these footprints, or did Columbus' Indians kill off those people?

It would be fun one day if the people we call "Native Americans" are suddenly not so native and can no longer come to the conquest debate with clean hands.

And so the question is again asked: were the Indians present at the time of Columbus the same as the ones who left these footprints, or did Columbus' Indians kill off those people? It would be fun one day if the people we call "Native Americans" are suddenly not so native and can no longer come to the conquest debate with clean hands.

Another way to ask that question is: Was the pre-history of the Native Americans as scuzzy as the pre-history of the Euro-trash that came calling in the Americas?

And does it really matter?

Aside from noting that the Euro-hordes might have been a model for the recent SCOTUS decision on eminent domain...

Being a mixed bag of mostly Euro-trash with a dab of NA myself puts me in a situ of having a lot of dogs and just too damned many dogfights to think that it matters a whole heckuva' lot now and that it will matter even less a couple of generations into the future.

All that aside and as a function of pure Entertainment, I rather enjoy the idea that 'Native Americans' are turning out to be tens of thousands of years more 'native' than the Clovis First adherents would like for us to think. How could experts have been so wrong?

Both prints look a bit weird. The one is just toes and heal. If toes and heal are there where is the rest of the print? Also the toes seem to be in a straight line. The other print is weird too. It looks globby in a sort of unexplainable way.

Obviously you think too much.:)

This reminds me of the infamous 'Piltdown Man' hoax that fooled Darwinists/anthropologists for over 40 years.You'll notice the pale white foot of the man trying to show that his foot fits the find, but we have no given physical descriptions of the length or width of the discovered 'human footprints'.

Scientists Silvia Gonzalez, from Liverpool John Moores University, and Matthew Bennett, of Bournemouth University, found the footprints in an abandoned quarry close to the Cerro Toluquilla volcano in the Valsequillo Basin...

If British scientists accept this, Silvia Gonzalez's reputation is made - at least for a while.

But my point remains intact.

No, it doesn't. Anybody stupid enough to think that a footprint can be carbon dated has no business whatsoever criticizing the scientific method. You use the phrases "many scientists" and "much dispute" as if that means anything. It doesn't. Name the scientists, specify the dispute, or shut up.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.