To: fortheDeclaration
One would think Snelling could have gone to a more recent source if dating methods are as bad as he would like you to think. Instead he digs up some confusing results from a paper in 1976. I guess that was the best he had to work with, and besides, that makes it safer since few people can pull up the original source and see what they say.
257 posted on
05/31/2007 1:01:15 PM PDT by
ahayes
("Impenetrability! That's what I say!")
To: ahayes
One would think Snelling could have gone to a more recent source if dating methods are as bad as he would like you to think. Instead he digs up some confusing results from a paper in 1976. I guess that was the best he had to work with, and besides, that makes it safer since few people can pull up the original source and see what they say. More ad hominem.
The facts are that the dating is based on assumptions of a certain level of C14 and if that level was in fact smaller than thought, it would give an appearance of it being older.
279 posted on
06/02/2007 12:44:38 PM PDT by
fortheDeclaration
(We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! -Abe Lincoln)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson