posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 06:43 PM
The thing with being stone, it is impossible to date the work on it by normal dating means. If it had been found in a tunnel or cave, there should
have been some sediment from dust falling on it or even floods, cave ins, etc. But since the position of where it had been found (if it had been
accurately documented) hasnt been reported, that cant be done.
So they can look at the patina on the rock, this might give an indication of how long the face has been exposed to the air/weather. And they could
look to see if the patina matches where it was found, so say it has a 1000 year seawater patina on it and they found it in a tunnel, then it was put
in the tunnel recently. Or say it has red dust patina on it and the dust in the tunnel is grey, and there are no traces of the grey dust having sat on
the rock for very long, then you can conclude that it was put there recently too.
The other thing they can look at is the engravings, were they made by modern tools or ancient ones. What is a modern tool though, I mean if these guys
had gone around the world then couldnt the also have had a rotating drill like tool with a diamond or saphire tip or something? Soemtimes there are
microscpoic specks in the engraving that can help date it, like snail shells or specks of burnt wood.
The thing that gets me about these discoveries is that most of the above is not possible, thus leaving it up to a matter of faith to belive or not.
Also, with this particular case, I wonder why they would have made the map? What use would it be to anyone, certainly not practical. Ceremonial
perhaps, with the eye in Iraq. The fact that they hadnt included things like the pyramids and the great wall, or the Amazon river on it, makes me
think that, if it is ancient, they saw the Earth from far above, not travelled around it.