Originally posted by kdog1982

Originally posted by St Udio
what about the possibility that the artifact was washed ashore... there have been tsunamis throughout history...

in this scenario there were no explorers or adventurers seeking trade or new lands to exploit... there might have been a Tsunami wave that caused a small boat to get carried into the land of Alaska... and the indigenous people
gathered up the pieces of strange items as keepsakes from the far western sea

I like that theory.

Maybe they cut it out of the belly of a shark they caught that ate some china man.

Oddly enought that IS a possibility!

I don't really see a big issue here. Lots of people are fixated on "Big Dates" like 1492 because that was the first time Europe actually paid attention to Columbus. Then thpse fixated come upon something like this and loudly proclaim, "You see??? We've been LIED to and the experts were wrong, wrong wrong! ha ha ha!"

Balderdash. Why should the "experts" be blamed for other peoples' fixations? I remember in grade school, in Ms. Hall's fifth grade class in, umm, 1959, hearing about new discoveries that pointed to the Vikings and Leif Erickson discovering America about 1000 AD. The idea that Columbus was not first had filtered down to elementary school texts over 60 years ago! That's an amazing discovery in itself!

OF COURSE there was trade and contact betwen continents a long time ago. Whether it was Portugese fishermen following the ice over to the East Coast, Asians of one sort or another wandering over to the West Coast, Africans stumbling over to Brazil and Argentina in South America or Polynesians winding up on the shores of Peru, there had to have been a lot of contacts over the centuries. There is even speculation that the Roman Empire mined copper in Canada!

In all these cases, whomever showed up was either assimilated or died out or got back home again and didn't have the wherewithall or contacts to get on the Internet and put on his blog where he had been. We have a few dates that managed to get themselves into the historical record, and a zillion dates that did not.

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85

Originally posted by Picollo30
isnt carbon-14 dating supposed to be uinreliable?

Not as unreliable as our History classes we must take.

The carbon dating works to a degree...better than most think.

He's wrong, it's fairly unreliable. It CAN be very accurate. There are also periods where you more or less need to know the date of the object to date it.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

There are also periods where you more or less need to know the date of the object to date it.

Oh? Please explain

I remember in grade school, in Ms. Hall's fifth grade class in, umm, 1959, hearing about new discoveries that pointed to the Vikings and Leif Erickson discovering America about 1000 AD. The idea that Columbus was not first had filtered down to elementary school texts over 60 years ago! That's an amazing discovery in itself!

OF COURSE there was trade and contact betwen continents a long time ago. Whether it was Portugese fishermen following the ice over to the East Coast, Asians of one sort or another wandering over to the West Coast, Africans stumbling over to Brazil and Argentina in South America or Polynesians winding up on the shores of Peru, there had to have been a lot of contacts over the centuries. There is even speculation that the Roman Empire mined copper in Canada!

The reality of the Norse being here was proved in 1960

Trade and contact between Western Alaska and Eastern Siberia, between the Inuit peoples, has been continuous for thousands of years.

Africans? Zero evidence for them or a robust naval technology - just look at the off shore islands of Africa - not touched - it's rather amusing that Madagascar was colonized by the Indonesian before the Africans

Polynesian may have gotten to the S or Central America, they had the naval technology but there is no evidence that they did

Er, no the Roman's did take copper from NA they had plenty in the Med region