Giant raccoon? I've made better imprints dropping my hamburger.
I do hope the sand was dry.
I follow stories on clovis points etc. And my conclusion is pre columbian people traveled, traded, had skilled trades. And were not stupid
Evolution News: Humanlike Footprints in Crete Dated to 6 Million Years Ago!
by Disillusioned JW 18 Replies latest social current
-
-
Rivergang
Certainly, the processes by which geologists date such things require a little bit more than an eight-second sound bite to describe!
I think that it is all too easy to dismiss anything we cannot understand with a "Sounds like bull to me" type response.
-
peacefulpete
In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion. (1987) -- Carl Sagan
-
Disillusioned JW
Lava ash can dated radiometrically and thus the impression made in such ash that became hardened can be dated, though the 6 million old footprints (which apparently were not in lava ash) were dated by "geophysical and micropaleontological" methods instead.
I got duped into rejecting evolution and into becoming baptized as a JW partly because I was duped by the WT's arguments against the reliability of carbon dating and other radiometric dating (such as uranium-lead dating and potassium-argon dating). But several years ago I started looking up the WT's quotes of scientists descriptions of radiometric dating and I began reading what other scientific books (as well as encyclopedia articles) said on the subject. I was stunned to see what they say about how reliable it is and how scientists know it is reliable. That caused me to be angry at the WT for twisting what the scientists say about radiometric dating.
Regarding the idea of Big Foot prints, a main problem with them is that they could easily have been made by modern-day humans as hoaxes instead of by a Bigfoot and neither a Bigfoot animal/ape-man nor a fossil of one has ever been found, unlike the case for fossils of ape-men (or at least fossils resembling such).
Simon, are you a young earth creationist?
-
DATA-DOG
How do Scientists know what “Ape-Men” looked like? It wasn’t that long ago that Dinosaurs didn’t have feathers… I think these Scientists are like the Weatherman… There’s some data and a lot of hunches and they get paid even if they are wrong.. Pretty sweet job. Just keep cranking out content. When I watch some Science shows it’s for entertainment because I like the CG, but it may as well be Dino-Bird vs Mega-Crocktopus.
DD
-
Earnest
DATA-DOG : How do Scientists know what “Ape-Men” looked like?
-
JoenB75
This thread is funny, perhaps even historical. It is not everyday you see the credibility of evolution science compared to that of JW beliefs. I take it you guys are not Bible thumpers
-
Disillusioned JW
There is a fascinating science article called "Fossils Upend Conventional Wisdom about Evolution of Human Bipedalism: For most of human evolution, multiple species with different ways of walking upright coexisted" located at https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fossils-upend-conventional-wisdom-about-evolution-of-human-bipedalism/ . The article is written by a paleoanthropologist. The latter part of the article says in part the following.
"The fossil record of apes from the Miocene epoch (23 million to 5.3 million years ago) highlights other unknowns. Paleoanthropologists working in Africa have struggled to find ape fossils from this all-important time period when hominins diverged from other apes. But their counterparts in southern Europe have turned up an impressive collection of bones from apes that used to live in Spain, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Hungary and Turkey. Judging from their hands, arms, backs, hips and legs, these European apes didn’t knuckle-walk like a chimpanzee. Instead some of them may have been able to move on two legs more often and more efficiently than modern African apes do. Depending on where these ancient apes—such as the 11.6-million-year-old Danuvius guggenmosi from Germany, first announced in 2019—fit into the family tree, it is even possible that the ape from which the ancestors of humans, chimpanzees and gorillas split was not a knuckle-walker at all but more upright, using hand-assisted bipedalism to “walk” through the trees. In that case, the unique hominin adaptation would be not bipedal walking per se but rather bipedal walking on the ground. If more fossils continue to support this hypothesis, then rudimentary bipedalism might turn out not to be a new form of locomotion at all; it may be an old one co-opted for a new environment as our ancestors shifted from an arboreal to a terrestrial existence.
This idea is controversial and in need of further testing. The challenge is that paleoanthropologists have yet to unearth fossil foot or leg bones from Africa during the key time period when the lineages that would eventually lead to humans, chimpanzees and gorillas were beginning to diverge, between 12 million and seven million years ago. To fill in that gap, we rely on the anatomy of those ancient apes from southern Europe. In a way, it is like trying to figure out what your great-grandmother looked like by studying tattered black-and-white photographs of your 19th-century cousins three times removed. They’ll provide some clues but not the full picture. We’ll see how this hypothesis holds up in the decades to come as more fossils are recovered from sites around the Mediterranean and in Africa. For now, though, the very beginnings of upright walking remain shrouded in mystery."
-
stan livedeath
6 million year old humanlike footprints found in concrete.