Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The latest scientific discoveries. Must see!

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hicup2_NSBE]
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
That idea that our species is 150k years older is controversial. The Moroccan find is not definitely Homo sapiens.
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
the trouble with carbon dating is that it never works when age is known, but is believed to work when age is assumed...
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
@wildbill83 it's good up to 50k years ago. I don't like the interpretation of the fossils
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
@HoraceGreenley [quote]it's good up to 50k years ago[/quote] Did they carbon date something that said "made in China, 48,000BC" on it? 🤔
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
@wildbill83 that works. I said 50k years ago, meaning 50,000 years ago
wildbill83 · 36-40, M
@HoraceGreenley but how do you know it works to 50,000 years if you don't know the actual age without carbon dating? aka. circular reasoning...
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
@wildbill83 agreed. My point is given it's sensitivity. All dating techniques must be collaborated with other techniques. It's a guess.
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
@wildbill83 so in this case, Carbon dating can't be used for material as old as these fossils. Of course fossils like this don't have any organic material to date anyway.