400,000 year old human tooth?

by sabastious 26 Replies latest social current

• 

  james_woods

  I am skeptical about the 400,000 year age claim as well - I have yet to read what method was used to date the tooth. Certainly, C14 will not go that far back, if indeed it could be used on a tooth.

  Didn't they say they just found it on Saturday or Sunday last week and are already claiming to know the age?

  BTW, is that supposed to be an actual picture of the tooth in question? The guy is just holding it there in his bare hand?

  Maybe it is just me, but I would have thought they would have tried to keep it out of possible contact with modern human DNA -
• 

  SacrificialLoon

  I loved the first dune book read it back in 1969, the movie was good because jurgen prochnow one of my favorite actors was in it.

  Stewart was an awesome Gurney.

  "ATOMICS!"
• 

  thetrueone

  This new find will go through close analytical scientific evacuation in the next little while to be sure, it will be interesting to see what

  the final median conclusion will be in the biological anthropological community.

  The growing evidence has reached monumental heights of just how old life on earth really is including the human species.

  But religionists like the JWS still claim that man is only a few thousand years old.

  Where then is the "Truth" in religion and what has religion established itself on, is it the embrace of past human ignorance,

  fear and superstition, cultivated and embellished to bring power and wealth into men's hands ?
• 

  BurnTheShips

  BTW, is that supposed to be an actual picture of the tooth in question? The guy is just holding it there in his bare hand?

  Yeah, what if it has ancient DNA? You'd think they'd be keeping it as clean as possible.

  BTS
• 

  james_woods

  Yeah, what if it has ancient DNA? You'd think they'd be keeping it as clean as possible.

  BTS

  Or, at the very least, have somebody with clean fingernails to hold it up for the press.
• 

  snowbird

  Now, now, JWoods.

  Perhaps it's the hand of Avi Gopher, the archaeologist who heads the team.

  Archaeologists must find it very hard to keep their nails clean.

  Syl
• 

  james_woods

  Now, now, JWoods.

  Perhaps it's the hand of Avi Gopher, the archaeologist who heads the team.

  Archaeologists must find it very hard to keep their nails clean.

  So must automotive mechanics - but I have noticed that my Ferrari technician always uses latex gloves when he works on my engine. Don't Archaeologists have them too?

  Seriously, I have to agree with you that the probable real age of this tooth is going to be a fraction of the claimed 400,000. That seems awfully old in itself, and doubly so when you consider the condition shown and the location of the find. (no - I am not a 7,000 year creative day fan at all; it just seems like a very ancient date to be quoting without meticulous proof)
• 

  Lore

  I have yet to read what method was used to date the tooth. Certainly, C14 will not go that far back, if indeed it could be used on a tooth.

  The article says the team "dated them according to the layers of earth where they were found. "

  So if it was found in an undisturbed layer of stratum that was deposited 400k years ago, it's unlikely to be newer than the dirt that was deposited on top of it.

  Lets say you know a volcano erupted in an area 20 years ago, and you find a ring under the ash from that eruption. If there are no signs that is was buried there after the fact it means that is was laying there before the eruption, so the ring is at least 20 years old.

  Not that I know ANYTHING about this tooth or the dirt it was found in. I'm just explaining the dating technique the article says they used.
• 

  james_woods

  The article says the team "dated them according to the layers of earth where they were found. "

  So if it was found in an undisturbed layer of stratum that was deposited 400k years ago, it's unlikely to be newer than the dirt that was deposited on top of it.

  Right - but that just moves the question to "what method did you use to date the stratum to 400k years?"

  Empiracally, 400K years sounds very old for a human tooth - but it also sounds very young for a stratum in most circumstances.

  Maybe I am still feeling a little burned by the NASA "discovery of a new form of life with arsenic DNA", (plus some pretty notorious previous "finds" by Israeli archeologists), but I want to see better (and more convincing) proof before I buy into this.
• 

  snowbird

  This is from another site about the (alleged) 400K-year-old tooth.

  According to the researchers, their discoveries are likely to change the perception that modern man originated in Africa.

  Tee hee hee.

  It all began in a Garden.

  Syl