To: The_Victor
I am more interested in the modern ones found at our borders.
2 posted on
12/01/2005 5:35:18 AM PST by
satchmodog9
( Seventy million spent on the lefts Christmas present and all they got was a Scooter)
To: The_Victor
"...Footprints discovered in Mexico are either more than 1 million years older than other evidence of humans in the Western Hemisphere or not footprints at all,...">Pardon me while I hold my enthusiasm in reserve...
3 posted on
12/01/2005 5:36:21 AM PST by
Khurkris
("Hell, I was there"...Elmer Keith.)
To: The_Victor
Repost of 3 yesterday
"Search" is your friend.
4 posted on
12/01/2005 5:37:41 AM PST by
xcamel
(a system poltergeist stole it.)
To: The_Victor
5 posted on
12/01/2005 5:40:44 AM PST by
The_Victor
(If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
To: The_Victor
7 posted on
12/01/2005 5:42:54 AM PST by
The_Victor
(If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
To: All
8 posted on
12/01/2005 5:45:22 AM PST by
The_Victor
(If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
To: The_Victor
Which way were they headed?
9 posted on
12/01/2005 5:47:49 AM PST by
Dallas59
(“You love life, while we love death"( Al-Qaeda & Democratic Party)
To: The_Victor
12 posted on
12/01/2005 6:22:24 AM PST by
Jeff F
To: The_Victor
One million years, 200,000 years in Barstow, CA, 40,000 years in Mexico or 11,500 years for Clovis. Somebody really must rethink the presence of man in North America.
To: The_Victor
So a footprint is a footprint if it agrees with their theory and not a footprint if it... well you know.
Idiot scientists... NOT!
15 posted on
12/01/2005 4:35:35 PM PST by
Jo Nuvark
(Those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed. Gen 12:3)
To: The_Victor
"You're really only left with two possibilities," Renne said. "One is that they are really old hominids — shockingly old — or they're not footprints."I'm sure glad that there are ONLY two possibilities!!!!!!!
17 posted on
12/01/2005 5:06:58 PM PST by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: The_Victor
Sixty to one says that Darwinists without inspection will "find" that they are not footprints. /sarc
18 posted on
12/01/2005 6:27:08 PM PST by
AndrewC
(Darwinian logic -- It is just-so if it is just-so)
To: The_Victor
So, the material was formed 1.3 million years ago. Knowing the age of the material doesn't indicate when the volcano spit it out or when the footprints were made.
21 posted on
12/01/2005 10:10:55 PM PST by
zot
(GWB -- four more years!)
26 posted on
04/25/2006 12:13:06 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
27 posted on
02/12/2007 10:15:58 PM PST by
SunkenCiv
(I last updated my profile on Saturday, February 3, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: The_Victor
Report Examines Ancient Mexican Footprints
Were they heading north?
29 posted on
02/12/2007 10:27:18 PM PST by
aruanan
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
