Re: U of South Carolina Releases Topper Radiocarbon Dates

From: Doug Weller (dweller_at_ramtops.removethisdemon.co.uk)
Date: 11/26/04 

Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:02:50 +0000

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 05:49:50 GMT, in sci.archaeology, I E Johansson quoted
Seppo:

[SNIP]

>> Take that scenario and multiply it hundred + fold and you get the
>> picture - there are hundreds of these "non authentic" items around.
>> Items many consider to be genuine indication of pre-Columbian visits.
>> I'll name a few - KRS - Roman figurine ca 800AD - beards - Skeleton -
>> Arabic writing of unknown language - Norse Axe - coin ....... etc
>> etc.... every one are said to be "fakes" or whatever convoluted
>> reasoning for them NOT being pre-Columbian. No, don't even THINK about
>> asking for specifics - that isn't what this is about.
>>
>> Step back, take a broader more all encompassing view. When there are
>> so many artefacts around, the myopic view of formula derived "finding"
>> to say it is a "fake" can no longer apply to every one of them. It no
>> longer fits logic nor common sense that ALL items are FAKES and
>> forgeries or con artists attempting to earn some kudos as inevitably
>> the claims suggests!!

[SNIP]

Of course he doesn't want us discussing details, the devil is in the
details. And he's adding apples, stones and baseball bats (or whatever)
making it looks as though they have something in common.

Eg -- beards, so what? They aren't fakes, hoaxes, not pre-Columbian, etc.
They're just beards that some people want to believe prove whatever their
current Truth is.
Roman figurine 800 AD -- I presume he's confused that with the Roman head,
but maybe not. We simply don't know if that's from an early shipwreck or
whatever, or from a Spanish explorer. Not enough information.

And so on -- Norse coin, which if it's the one I think of is clearly
genuine and part of the accepted proof of Norse visits to North America.

None of the above are fakes or forgeries or con artists. :-)

A lot of the claims that are made that can no longer be examined (mainly
19th century) are probably just misinterpretations of things we would now
understand.

Yuri used to make the same argument -- which is basically you don't have
to actually show that the evidence proves anything, you just have to make
long lists.

That's not the way science works, although it's a good example of the way
a lot of people approach the topic.

Doug 

-- 
Doug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply
Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk

Relevant Pages