Originally posted by CALGARIAN
So what does this mean? That carbon dating is inaccurate, and this footprint is only few thousand years old (which would change the laughable
geometric column) or that it IS accurate and everything we were taught about evolution is incorrect?
I think both are bull, IMO.
Carbon 14 dating is for organic matter only. Also, as I understand it, it's only good back about 70,000 years max, unless they've refined it
considerably in the last few years. So Carbon dating would NOT be used on a footprint in the first place, and not one that is this old. As far as the
conclusions of the article, it appears to be saying the footprint was made by a more primitive creature, more ape-like, than first thought, that it
isn't modern at all. In other words, it's not an anomaly and its presence does not contradict what we think we know about human origins.
In terms of this undocumented video, i believe that's Michael Cremo talking. He wrote "Forbidden Archeology" a number of years ago where he claims to
have cataloged hundreds of artifacts that "prove" ancient humans, giant skeletons, etc.
The problem with Cremo is two fold. First, his documentation is really bad, often consisting of old newspaper accounts from the 1800s. I've read his
1,000 page book clear through. Even here in this vid you notice he provided no proof at all that Mary Leakey found such footprints. He says it's all
been suppressed because of money and power. How, exactly? That's a pretty broad claim. Further, Cremo is a Hare Krishna type guy, a Hindu creationist,
deep into it, and his religion says humans are ancient, so he's sticking up for it. That's not exactly objective. His Hindu name is Drutakarma
In conclusion, there's nothing in this find that contradicts anything about evolution at all.
Exactly.. Plus the world only recently is at an equailbrium of carbon coming in and out, due to stability of the sun (somewhat)
OoooooK! Which is PRECISELY why controls are sought and used. You think C14 guys have never thought of this? The very first carbon dating was done on
an Egyptian boat where the age was known because of Egyptian historical texts. The C14 tests aligned perfectly with the texts, so it accurately
determined the age of the boat. PhD dissertations have been done on this issue.
In any case C14 is NOT an issue here. It was not used, so why was it even brought up?
edit on 1/2/2013 by schuyler because: (no reason given)