Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors

November 17, 2019, 4:24 am UTC    
October 27, 2018 03:54PM
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yep. Here's what it looks like

[www.hallofmaat.com]
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's there to refute?

RB wrote: "Exactly and these look like fully formed spearheads,"

"Name the industry."
No answer...yet.

"RB wrote: "and if you push it back to 15.5 KYA"

LO: "You didn't even get the date right,
you may want to read more than the abstract."

Also you may want to try looking at Fig 2 cross section A-A.

Not to mention (from the paper): (Figs. 2 and 3).
"The radiocarbon dating method was not used to date the archaeological
components at the Friedkin site because there were no carbon
samples that would yield reliable and accurate ages. In situ charcoal
is not preserved, and all bones are leached of collagen."

How cherry picking nice, no one can refute Imagination.

"and you want to have a discussion? Why don't you read the papers first before commenting? Or are we going to just have a rerun of this discussion:"
[www.hallofmaat.com]

RB wrote: "throw a couple of thousand more"

LO asked: "Couple of thousand more what, more disappearing acts?"

LO wrote: "What is there to discuss, a bone-free, DNA free, pile of mixed up clay pseudo-industry that can't repeat itself twice, let alone a "thousand".

Still no answer. what can one do to refute reality, right, snip away.

RB wrote: "onto it to allow migration from Beringia to Texas. Yep, Clovis wasn't first."

Only if a person doesn't believe in DNA results.

"[www.sapiens.org]
Score: Clovis/Folsom 15+... Buttermilk 0"

Still zeros for Buttermilk, in spite of the snipping.

DNA?
[www.hallofmaat.com]
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not suprised at all. I think this discovery at
> over 100,000 is outside the range of any DNA.

Corrected by Lee Olsen:
[www.the-scientist.com]
"A 400,000-year-old mitochondrial genome adds new twists to scientists’ picture of early human evolution."

I'm always here to help make corrections...you're welcome.

LO wrote: "BTW, they have found a few human teeth at Buttermilk...DNA failed and so did the 14C dating.
How cherry picking nice. So how can one discuss nothing results?"

"Got direct-dating on human bone results here though:
[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

What do you have left at Buttermilk? Excuses by Waters et al.

To sum up the DNA evidence so far:
[www.scientificamerican.com]
[core.tdar.org]
[www.scientificamerican.com]
[www.nature.com]
[www.sciencemag.org]

"Score: Clovis 6 ...Buttermilk 0"

Thanks to Rick's snipping, guess things aren't going to improve over zeros at Buttermilk anytime soon.

"Grayson and Meltzer (2002) rejected the Manis mastodon site as
providing secure evidence for human interaction with a mastodon.
We did this because no complete report on the results of the
excavation had ever appeared (and still has not), because there
were no undoubted artifacts associated with the skeleton, because
there was no compelling evidence that the bones bore cut marks or
were broken in ways that could only be accounted for by human
action, and because it had not been shown that the bony object
protruding from the rib represents a projectile tip."

Only Waters can demand others to have site reports, while exempting himself from the that process.

But it's actually far worse than that.
Mammoth Trumpet 2011 Vol 26 (1)
page 6:
Waters "well-dated strata are only the begining....."
page 11:
Waters: "But before we can pass final judgment on the site, we need a good site report Jenkins agrees...."

Still no site report at Paisley, yet Waters et al. referenced Paisley as a backup for Buttermilk.

From the paper page 1:
"...indicating that people must have
been in North America ≥14.2 ka ago. In North America, humans were
present during the period ~14 to ~15 ka ago, as documented by archaeological
evidence radiocarbon dated to ~14.6 ka ago at Page-Ladson,
Florida (4); ~14.2 ka ago at Paisley Caves, Oregon (5); ~14.2 and
~14.8 ka ago at Schaefer and Hebior, Wisconsin (6, 7); and ~13.8 ka
ago at Manis, Washington (8)."

The only thing indicated is site reports count for Clovis but not pseudo-Clovis sites.

[tinyurl.com]
One of the skeptics, Thomas F. Lynch, a specialist in South American archeology
at Cornell University, said: "I'm still unconvinced. A lot of weak cases don't
add up to a strong case."









Subject Author Posted

Oldest Tool in America found?

Khazar-khum October 25, 2018 01:42PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 25, 2018 01:48PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Khazar-khum October 25, 2018 01:56PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 25, 2018 02:19PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 27, 2018 05:34PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Hermione October 28, 2018 08:01AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 28, 2018 02:07PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Khazar-khum October 28, 2018 05:09PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 29, 2018 09:05AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Khazar-khum October 29, 2018 04:30PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 30, 2018 07:24AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Khazar-khum October 30, 2018 01:15PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 31, 2018 07:17AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Khazar-khum October 31, 2018 10:35AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen November 01, 2018 07:52AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé November 01, 2018 12:52PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen November 01, 2018 08:46PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé November 03, 2018 07:38PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen November 04, 2018 08:53AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé November 04, 2018 11:36AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen November 04, 2018 12:59PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé November 05, 2018 10:31PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen November 08, 2018 09:19AM

**Weary Moderation Note**

Hermione November 08, 2018 10:09AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen November 08, 2018 11:42AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 25, 2018 03:37PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 25, 2018 04:04PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 25, 2018 04:43PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 25, 2018 05:04PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 25, 2018 11:13PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 26, 2018 03:12PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 26, 2018 03:44PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 26, 2018 04:44PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 26, 2018 08:51PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 26, 2018 09:13PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 27, 2018 07:58AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Rick Baudé October 27, 2018 10:21AM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen October 27, 2018 03:54PM

Re: Oldest Tool in America found?

Lee Olsen November 08, 2018 12:52PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login