[MHGinTN]

I'm aware that forgeries have been found and the forgers. What has not been dicounted are the original stones and those stones have been tested and found to be very old. It is akin to the cave drawings thought to be recent forgeries, yet a muddobbers nest dated to be 35,000 years old was found plastered over one of the paintings, thus proving that at least that image is very old.

[Swordmaker]

Only ONE person is responsible for finding the icastones and he has been implicated in the forgery. Stones cannot be "dated" to indicated any timeframe they may have been converted into artifacts. Please provide a peer reviewed article link for the "mud daubber" dating... exactly what percentage of the "mud" was composed of carbon that could be dated? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.