Posted on 01/08/2007 11:14:54 AM PST by blam
I agree with that 100%. But you must admit, archeology is one of the founding members of the "good ole boy" network. And old habits are tough to break.
Thank heavens for Kuhn. I'd love to see a middle school or h.s. freshman-level curriculum based on that text.
Kind'a like Oak Island...
The Topper radiocarbon date shows a classic symptoms
of "fringe" science: results that at the edge of resolution
or near the noise floor of any particular measurement method.
He's close to the edge of the ability of radiocarbon dating
(about 60K years), and the anthropogenic origin of his stone
tools is in question.
Time will tell, though. Plate techtonics was hinted at in
the 16th century, and again in 1912, but took another fifty
years after that to become widely accepted.
Paleoanthropology Division
Smithsonian Institute
207 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20078
Dear Sir:
Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled "211-D, layer seven, next to the clothesline post. Hominid skull." We have given this specimen a careful and detailed examination, and regret to inform you that we disagree with your theory that it represents "conclusive proof of the presence of Early Man in Charleston County two million years ago." Rather, it appears that what you have found is the head of a Barbie doll, of the variety one of our staff, who has small children, believes to be the "Malibu Barbie".
It is evident that you have given a great deal of thought to the analysis of this specimen, and you may be quite certain that those of us who are familiar with your prior work in the field were loathe to come to contradiction with your findings. However, we do feel that there are a number of physical attributes of the specimen which might have tipped you off to it's modern origin:
1. The material is molded plastic. Ancient hominid remains are typically fossilized bone.
2. The cranial capacity of the specimen is approximately 9 cubic centimeters, well below the threshold of even the earliest identified proto-hominids.
3. The dentition pattern evident on the "skull" is more consistent with the common domesticated dog than it is with the "ravenous man-eating Pliocene clams" you speculate roamed the wetlands during that time. This latter finding is certainly one of the most intriguing hypotheses you have submitted in your history with this institution, but the evidence seems to weigh rather heavily against it. Without going into too much detail, let us say that:
A. The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll that a dog has chewed on.
B. Clams don't have teeth.
It is with feelings tinged with melancholy that we must deny your request to have the specimen carbon dated. This is partially due to the heavy load our lab must bear in it's normal operation, and partly due to carbon dating's notorious inaccuracy in fossils of recent geologic record.
To the best of our knowledge, no Barbie dolls were produced prior to 1956 AD, and carbon dating is likely to produce wildly inaccurate results. Sadly, we must also deny your request that we approach the National Science Foundation's Phylogeny Department with the concept of assigning your specimen the scientific name "Australopithecus spiff-arino." Speaking personally, I, for one, fought tenaciously for the acceptance of your proposed taxonomy, but was ultimately voted down because the species name you selected was hyphenated, and didn't really sound like it might be Latin.
However, we gladly accept your generous donation of this fascinating specimen to the museum. While it is undoubtedly not a hominid fossil, it is, nonetheless, yet another riveting example of the great body of work you seem to accumulate here so effortlessly. You should know that our Director has reserved a special shelf in his own office for the display of the specimens you have previously submitted to the Institution, and the entire staff speculates daily on what you will happen upon next in your digs at the site you have discovered in your back yard.
We eagerly anticipate your trip to our nation's capital that you proposed in your last letter, and several of us are pressing the Director to pay for it. We are particularly interested in hearing you expand on your theories surrounding the "trans-positating fillifitation of ferrous ions in a structural matrix" that makes the excellent juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex femur you recently discovered take on the deceptive appearance of a rusty 9-mm Sears Craftsman automotive crescent wrench.
Yours in Science,
Harvey Rowe
Curator, Antiquities
Always listen to experts.
They'll tell you what can't be done, and why.
Then do it.
LAZARUS LONG
In part because the mechanism was missing from the theory. I find it interesting that even objects suspected of being made by humans require multiple lines of reasoning and evidence to distinguish them from natural formations.
This will be squashed because it violates PC dogma.
--Yet more evidence that radiocarbon dating is a bunch of BS. It's amazing that anyone still listens to the Darwinists.--
Nothing here to indicate problems with radiocarbon dating.
Always some dumbass that has to ruin the thread.
Also, if it's fake, I don't want to know. It's much funnier if I can engage in a willing suspension of disbelief.
I'm a creationist and the scriptural evidence I've seen points to a date of roughly (give or take a bunch of years since I can't remember the exact figures) 4.5 billion years.
Vedas.
Please don't lump all creationists with young earth ones.
Oh, no. that was actually much earlier.
Since this was the remnants of created artifacts, and would come from her productive middle age period, they actually quite later than when she was "born".
Any avid golfer that has read "The Legend of Bagger Vance" knows that this discovery is long over due. Now get in the field Junah.
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.