Lee Olsen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Khazar-khum Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Clovis is dead, Lee.
>
> ...but Halloween isn't?
>
>
> > Moving the goal posts won't
> > bring it back.
>
> It only seems like moving the goal posts to those
> who can't write rebuttals in a peer-reviewed
> journal and don't read behind pay walls.

Or those who dismiss, ignore or ridicule the overwhelming evidence that has been published in peer review journals.
>
>
>
> Good luck on your next trick or treating
> adventure.
>
> Meanwhile:
> "In summary, we must not lower the bar for
> evaluating
> pre-Clovis sites. Any potential pre-Clovis site
> must
> meet the scientific criteria by which Folsom and
> Clovis
> were judged (Waters 2000)."
> Michael R. Waters
> Criteria for Confirming Human Antiquity in the
> New
> World
> Scientific American Discovering Archaeology
> Jan/Feb 2000
>

What a load of baloney. They threw the bar out when it comes to Clovis. Anybody that stumbles through the door with Clovis point is given a seat at the table of Cloviscientology. Here's the proof [www.academia.edu]

Fifty years of unprovenanced, site-report free, DNA free, cache collections and only one burial excavated with the tender mercies of a bulldozer. But do they appy the same excruciating standards to these artifacts that they do to other pre-Clovis sites? They do not. Nope just collect them shove them in a back closet somewhere until they get donated to a museum. But that's Cloviscientology for you.
>
>
>
>
>