posted on Dec, 2 2017 @ 02:16 PM
Not the catchiest of titles is it? An sorry it's abbreviated, there was a character limit.
Mitchel Townsend is one of the authors and gave this paper at the 69th Annual Anthropology Research Conference in Tacoma Washington last year. It's
flown under the radar for awhile now even I hadn't heard about it. So I dug in.
So far it's intriguing, for a science PDF anyways.
I don't know how to link directly to the paper, so have included this article that does have the link.
Yeah...I thought that too, however I read the paper and the very few critiques online about it which I'll also link. I'm on the fence with it to be
honest. Plus to be more truthful I'd have to read the supporting papers cited to get a better sense of how legitimate this is. On the surface it
doesn't look too shabby and is currently been submitted and NOT rejected by the Journal of Archaeological Science/Reports.
So I'm asking what you all think?
One of the stumbling blocks I have was a criticism regarding the bone stacks consisting of the "non-utility" parts of the prey animals. Altho the
point could be made those were consumed in situ and the better parts carted off, it's still a stretch?
See argument in link
I realize this could easily have fit in other ATS sections but since it's already been presented in an Anthropology context and I wasn't looking to
start WW3 debating all the side topics that tag along the Sasquatch subject, plus I need educated eyes to look at the paper cause I'm a layperson it
seemed better to post it here.
Lastly here's the other critique I found.
Found link to paper
You can open it in word or on your browser.
edit on 2-12-2017 by Caver78 because: Title had to be abbreviated due to length
edit on 2-12-2017 by Caver78 because: (no