Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what?

So you are confused again, I referenced this paper:
[cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com]
Your link goes to Haynes, so wrong reply.

I clearly stated in plain readable English I agreed with Ruth Gruhn and Demere
[www.hallofmaat.com]
that old was more plausible than recent.
Apparently you aren't following this thread or Nature Magazine.

> > POST THE LINK AND I'LL WATCH THE VIDEO

Start watching. You couldn't possibly have missed the videos, the photos, and diagrams too, right? If you can't find the videos, look at the photos, they are on the internet for free, no pay wall. They haven't disappeared yet.

[blogs.discovermagazine.com]
"Research published today in Nature included not only descriptions of the bones and artifacts associated with the potential carcass processing site, but also information on how the team replicated the damage on modern elephant bones in Tanzania, using tools they believe the alleged First American hominins might have had. (Credit Kate Johnson, San Diego Natural History Museum)"

They charged you a pay-wall admission and the museum didn't have a exhibit/projector running the videos? The fact remains, in spite of your diversions, no hominin breaks teeth for marrow or tools.