The nail in the Evolutionary Coffin, the final spike placed there by the Royal Society itself.

page: 2
34
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   
So now we know that someone claimed to have footprints and used 2 dating methods to obtain dates. One of the methods was used in a situation where it is likely to be questionable.

Renne used 2 methods and obtained dates quite different that also were in agreement with each other. Renne has a lot of experience dating materials and understanding why dating methods might not be reliable.

So let's turn to the MSM to see what they reported on this issue.
www.usatoday.com...
Muchof the material is similar, but there is this comment from another researcher.

Paleoanthropologist Tim White, professor of integrative biology at UC Berkeley, said he was not surprised at the new finding.

"The evidence (the British team) has provided in their arguments that these are footprints is not sufficient to convince me they are footprints," said White, who did not contribute to the new study.



+2 more 
posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 



"Other creatures do have "faces" which identify themselves as individuals."

Do you talk to the animals or something? How do you know that?

Yes, I do talk to them. Do you not have pets? Cats/dogs in your home?
They absolutely have "faces" and "eyes" and mannerisms that make them unique.
I know that from a lifetime of living and interacting with them. They have voices, gestures, ways of "speaking" that are unique among their species. Every one of them is a "different" personality.
And they do a kick-butt job of it, too...... anyone who lives with animals and doesn't recognize their unique styles and personalities is totally out of touch.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by stereologist
 


What. No links to back up your comments?
I personally would like to read about the stuff you're speaking about.


You posted before the link so here is another link.

Since this is of course a cover-up type of conspiracy, we have to use more complicated methods to obtain the links.

So once again, we will visit the web archives, and combine the two links, and you can then remove both spaces in the HTTP of this archive combo link and paste it into your browser.

ht tp://web.archive.org/web/20070510144237/ht tp://www.mexicanfootprints.co.uk/collaborators.htm

Collaborators in this exhibit...

Professor David Huddart, Liverpool John Moores University. Quaternary Geology, Tephrochronology.
Professor Matthew Bennett, Bournemouth University. Quaternary Geology, footprint mapping, laser scanning techniques and GIS
Dr Marta Mirazon Lahr, Cambridge University. Craniometrics database of Mexican Paleoamericans and Pericues.
Professor Alan Cooper formerly of Oxford University. Ancient Human DNA extraction.
Dr Phillip Endicott, Henry Welcome Ancient Molecules, Oxford University. Ancient DNA extraction of Mexican Paleoamerican populations
Dr Jean-Luc Schwenninger, Oxford University. Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dating
Dr Angela Lamb and Professor Melanie Leng , NERC Isotope Geoscience Laboratories, British Geological Survey and University of Nottingham. Palaeoenvironmental Reconstructions and stable isotope studies from sediments.
Prof. Sarah Metcalfe and Dr Rhiannon Stevens, University of Nottingham and NERC Isotope Geosciences Laboratory. Paleoenvironmental reconstructions using diatoms and isotopic studies of sediments, bones and teeth
Antrop. Fis.José Concepción Jiménez-López and José Antonio Pompa y Padilla, Direccion de Antropologia Fisica, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia, Mexico City, Craniometric studies from the Preceramic Collection.
Antrop.Alfonso Rosales-Lopez and Leticia Sanchez Garcia, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia (INAH) La Paz, Baja California Sur, Archaeology and skeletal studies from Pericue Populations.
Dr Tom Higham and Dr Chris BronkRamsey, Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory. Accelerator Mass Spectrometer Radiocarbon Dating
Ing. Geologo Alberto Gonzalez-Huesca, Geophysics Institute, Mexico City. Geochemistry of the Xalnene Ash.
Prof. Rainer Grün, Australian National University. Electron Spin Resonance Dating of teeth.
Dr Alistair Pike, Bristol University. Uranium Series Dating of human and megafaunal bones.
Dr Simon Kelley, Open University. Argon-Argon dating of the Xalnene Ash and lava.


ht tp://web.archive.org/web/20070514193221/ht tp://www.mexicanfootprints.co.uk/research/classifying.htm


In total 269 human and animal prints were discovered, preserved in coarse ash. Approximately 60% of the prints were human, with 36% of the human prints classified as children’s because of their size. Several types of animal prints were also identified including dogs, big cats and animals with cloven feet, possibly deer, camels or bovids. Several short trails of footprints are visible in some parts of the quarry.
edit on 3-3-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 
Why do hundreds of millions of dogs of all varieties have slightly different faces?

Because we have selectively breeded them together over many successive generations...

Just like the aliens have selectively breeded us by manipulating and mixing the genetic materials of prehistoric humans with their own dna over many generations and they still are doing it to us now,thats why people all over the world are abducted by aliens and experimented on...

We were made in their image...

And remember that people see things differently,what looks pretty to me,might appear ugly to someone else...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

edit on 3-3-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:51 PM
link   
The footprints were found in 2003.
By 2005 they were reported.
In 2005 another team dates the material with very different results.

So now on to 2008 where there is an article in National Geographic.
news.nationalgeographic.com...
The original team that found the "footprints" is using laser scanning to collect the prints and continues to use C14 dating and another technique involving luminescence testing.

A comment from the second team:

"I am amazed that they are still flogging that dead horse," said Paul Renne


Another researcher state:

"Very old human occupation of the Americas is possible," he said, "but if there were indeed people here that long ago, what happened to them in the next 25,000 years?"

"In this time, surely the population should have increased, and this would bring the presence of a high quantity of sites 16,000 to 20,000 years old," he said by email.

That's a pretty good question. Where are the other things we'd expect to find such as settlements, campfire rings, and tools.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Fix your links.

Your posting have no scientific value.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
So now we are on finding out what happened. Got up to 2008 and now on to 2010.

www.archaeologydaily.com...

The article begins by going over some of the older statements such as:

Crisscrossing the lakebed, they saw tracks, an ash field littered with hundreds of impressions that resembled footprints from adults and children, " along with birds, cats, dogs and species with cloven feet," as Nature magazine later reported. The team led by geoarchaeologist Silvia Gonzalez of the United Kingdom's Liverpool John Moores University, suspected the track's makers had fled an ancient eruption of the looming Cerro Toluquilla volcano, leaving their tracks in the now-famous "Xalnene Ash."


Then comes the real story. It seems that the younger dates are seen as unreliable by the original team.

A number of papers flew back and forth, some supporting the Argon results and one confirming the younger luminescence date. But in the latest turn, the Journal of Human Evolution paper led by Darren Mark of the Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre, and co-authored by Gonzalez, concedes the fight, replicating the Argon results from Renne's lab.


The article goes on to state that the marks in the rocks are therefore unlikely to be hominid marks.


So, does that rule out the chances that people emigrated into the America's further back than 15,000 years ago? Nope, says Mark, it just means there is no evidence for it.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Fix your links.

Your posting have no scientific value.


Please read and then post.

You asked who is Renne, see the original post for a link to his accreditation.

You have asked me to fix links, why don't you ask the programmers to fix the editor because Web Archive links from the way back machine will not work in this editor.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 



You asked who is Renne, see the original post for a link to his accreditation.

You have asked me to fix links, why don't you ask the programmers to fix the editor because Web Archive links from the way back machine will not work in this editor.


Now you are wrong again. I did not ask who Renne is.

About the links, you are wrong again. Write the links so they work.

Finally, you are completely wrong about all 3 arguments in the OP. Strike out!



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by Rocketman7
 
Why do hundreds of millions of dogs of all varieties have slightly different faces?

Because we have selectively breeded them together over many successive generations...

Just like the aliens have selectively breeded us by manipulating and mixing the genetic materials of prehistoric humans with their own dna over many generations and they still are doing it to us now,thats why people all over the world are abducted by aliens and experimented on...

We were made in their image...

And remember that people see things differently,what looks pretty to me,might appear ugly to someone else...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

edit on 3-3-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)


pin.primate.wisc.edu...

Do you recognize him or her? Of course you do, that is a monkey. A generic monkey and you cannot tell one face from another. The reason being the animals are not made the same way as humans.

You claim that dogs have slightly different faces but dogs of the same breed, at the same age, have the same face.
eg:
www.dogbreedinfo.com...

Yes they are different colors. Thats nothing to do with their facial features which in humans are unique so that they can be identified.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist


So who is Renne and why should his dates be considered?


Are you having trouble my friend? Maybe you need to relax, and take a deep breath, and just give it all a rest for a while.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Nothing you have provided is anything other than your own opinion. It is of little or no value.

Primates can tell individuals apart by their face.

www.sciencedaily.com...


With the help of the so called Thatcher illusion, scientists of the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics in Tübingen, Germany, have examined how people and macaque monkeys recognize faces and process the information in the brain. They found out that both species perceive the faces of their kin immediately, while the faces of the other species are processed in a different way.


Maybe you can't tell one dog from another, but others can. Your personal inability should not be extrapolated to others.

You were wrong about the so-called foot prints in Mexico. You are wrong about faces of other species. You are wrong about the Peruvian skulls.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
Arg 1 can be ruled out quite easily, the rest, not so much.

Regarding arg 1, many species can deseminate between each other quite easily. It has been determined that sheep can tell the difference between each other simply by the face.
www.thenakedscientists.com...

We're very interested in finding out and understanding whether sheep are in many way like humans in the way that they use facial cues to recognise each other.



From that link you provided

but we also derive emotional information from facial expressions. It occurred to us to ask the next question, which was if sheep can recognise and use faces, can sheep use faces to recognise emotional states? We looked at this not only in sheep, but looked at whether they can identify emotion in their human carers.


That has nothing to do with identity. Animals use smell to identify each other and mothers identify the cry of their children as well as the scent.

Here are some sheep. Now perhaps you missed the big joke about cloning sheep.
www.organicpurewool.co.uk...



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


The following was not addressed to you, but was a question posed in a narrative to other readers where I would make it clear how wrong you are about all you have posted. In this case I was asking the other readers to follow along and learn why Renne was important.

So who is Renne and why should his dates be considered?


It is not often where someone can strike out as badly as you have.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 



That has nothing to do with identity. Animals use smell to identify each other and mothers identify the cry of their children as well as the scent.


The issue is not whether there can be other methods of recognition. The issue is whether faces are the same or not in other species. As has been shown you are wrong. The faces of other species are different.

Everyone can see how you attempt to distract with off topic commentary that has no relevance.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 
The perceived differences in peoples faces are very slight when looked at as an entire species of seven billion faces and when people see eachother from a one on one,individual level,certain differences that one person sees,the other person may not notice at all...

If you and i looked at the same person at the same time,i'll clearly notice and see varying aspects and differences that you might not see...

And no one will ever be able to look at and keep a photographic record of the faces of seven billion people,to accurately compare and judge their similarities and differences and so surely there must be many,many people who have near identical faces impossible to tell apart,who will never look at eachother and will never know...

edit on 3-3-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by Rocketman7
 
The perceived differences in peoples faces are very slight when looked at as an entire species of seven billion faces and when people see eachother from a one on one,individual level,certain differences that one person sees,the other person may not notice at all...

If you and i looked at the same person at the same time,i'll clearly notice and see varying aspects and differences that you might not see...

And no one will ever be able to look at and keep a photographic record of the faces of seven billion people,to accurately compare and judge their similarities and differences and so surely there must be many,many people who have near identical faces impossible to tell apart,who will never look at eachother and will never know...

edit on 3-3-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)


"How does facial recognition software work?"
wiki.answers.com...



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Facial recognition software is not of interest. Your claim is:

Why do humans all have different faces when no other form of life has different faces including apes?

What a computer does has no bearing on the issue.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   
You have made no effort to defend item 2, the OP states

Arg 2) Why are there elongated skulls in Peru which have no fontanel? In fact their skulls are not plated in the same way homo sapiens are, In fact then, they are not homo sapiens. Not even close. So where did they come from and what is the evolutionary argument regarding them?

And if you say these are skulls that have been modified by planking etc as per common practices of South American Indians that is not true. Those skulls are easily identified. If you want more info look it up. Its there.


This is another hoax you're pushing. Care to provide links and evidence to defend this wacko claim?



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Is this an example of wacko claim?
minnieapolis.newsvine.com...

Peruvian anthropologist Renato Davila Riquelme has discovered the remains of an unidentified creature with a "triangle shaped" skull nearly as large as its 20-inch-tall body. [CORRECTION: 50-inch-tall body]





top topics
 
34
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join