Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Bill Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
This is my response to some comments by Paul to my post about the evolution of Homo Erectus. Notice that I am trying to keep that discussion free from the dissension brought on by the typical deniers comments. So, as I said in my original post I have brought the discussion over here.

Originally Posted By: paul
human footprints have been found in the U.S. alongside dinosaur footprints , the footprints ended where water erosion did not uncover the prints so they lifted up slabs of sediment to follow the footprints and underneath the slabs the footprints continued.

The problem with the human footprints you are referring to is that it would have been impossible for humans to have made footprints at the time of the dinosaurs. Humans did not evolve until millions of years after the end of the dinosaurs. Any reputable geologists who have examined the tracks reached the conclusion that they were fakes. Here is a link to a site that discusses the tracks. Notice that even a lot of Creationists have dismissed the tracks.

Originally Posted By: paul
is there anything that can be viewed or should we just think of it as a hoax?

One way to decide on the viability of a scientific report is to examine the credentials of the authors and the publication it was published in. In this case the main author seems to have been an anthropologist at the University of North Texas, in Denton, TX. The report was published in Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. Both of those seem to give a lot of credibility to the report.

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Bill Gill: Do you have a basic response to "Creation Affirmers"?


G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5