[Jack of all Trades]

I read the article. The “evidence is thin, incomplete or hearsay.

So here’s a thought experiment for you - if the stones are real, why do you assume that this proves that dinosaurs existed recently? Would you allow that (if they were real) the stones could also indicate that humans have been around for a lot longer than generally assumed (millions of years)?

[celmak]

"Would you allow that (if they were real) the stones could also indicate that humans have been around for a lot longer than generally assumed (millions of years)?"

Just as soon as Evo's begin to assume 10,000 years. Let me know when that happens. When it does, let me know if after allowing for 10,000 years that this person would be open to both.

[kimtom]

I read the article. The “evidence is thin, incomplete or hearsay....”

he referenced his quotes well. so I reject this statement.

“So here’s a thought experiment for you - if the stones are real....”

now that is an good question. (the point of the exercise)

[kimtom]

ditto see post 61