90,000-year-old human footprints found on a Moroccan beach are some of the oldest and best preserved in the world

[admin]

Researchers in Morocco happened upon a trackway containing 85 well-preserved human footprints that are some of the oldest in the world.

90,000-year-old human footprints found on a Moroccan beach are some of the oldest and best preserved in the world : Read more

 

[Sailormoonvslibs]

Hard to believe these so-called scientists or whatever they are still believe the Earth is 90, 000 years old much less the billions and trillions and gazillions of years they throw out there. They need to recognize we're not stupid and just own that they made a mistake, not continue the false narrative.

 

[sven]

Hard to believe these so-called scientists or whatever they are still believe the Earth is 90, 000 years old much less the billions and trillions and gazillions of years they throw out there. They need to recognize we're not stupid and just own that they made a mistake, not continue the false narrative.

No trillions or gazillions, just billions.

 

[Jan Steinman]

Hard to believe these so-called scientists or whatever they are still believe the Earth is 90, 000 years old much less the billions and trillions and gazillions of years they throw out there. They need to recognize we're not stupid and just own that they made a mistake, not continue the false narrative.

Would you care to document your assertions? What is your evidence, The Bible?

 

[cecilia fx]

Hard to believe these so-called scientists or whatever they are still believe the Earth is 90, 000 years old much less the billions and trillions and gazillions of years they throw out there. They need to recognize we're not stupid and just own that they made a mistake, not continue the false narrative.

what?

 

[freeassociating]

Hard to believe these so-called scientists or whatever they are still believe the Earth is 90, 000 years old much less the billions and trillions and gazillions of years they throw out there. They need to recognize we're not stupid and just own that they made a mistake, not continue the false narrative.

Agreed, we all know everything was made last thursday.

 

[akiprev]

Would you care to document your assertions? What is your evidence, The Bible?

No need for the Bible. Just see discernible dinosaur fosills sticking from ground (or even lying on it as I saw in China), and their prefectly preserved tracks. Then use your elementary school math to plot the damage made by erosion and the rock erosion rate (ca 40ft/my).

 

[saymyname]

The point the original commenter is making is if the scoence used for dating is wrong then our estimates will always be exaggerated. Uranium-thorium-lead dating according to a livescience article I read was used to date the Earth to 4.4 billion years, but again we can only use what information we have at this time. The issue is until a new science to date things is provided then the world will continue to utilize what we have available.

 

[akiprev]

what?

If you're really interested what's all this is about, read my answer to Jan Steinman below this comment of yours.

 

[bolide]

No need for the Bible. Just see discernible dinosaur fosills sticking from ground (or even lying on it as I saw in China), and their prefectly preserved tracks. Then use your elementary school math to plot the damage made by erosion and the rock erosion rate (ca 40ft/my).

Still at it? As I said to you before, there's no reason to suppose that fossils on the surface have been at the surface for more than a few years. In the case of this article, the article clearly states that the footprints were preserved by being rapidly buried in clay sediments.

 

[akiprev]

Still at it? As I said to you before, there's no reason to suppose that fossils on the surface have been at the surface for more than a few years. In the case of this article, the article clearly states that the footprints were preserved by being rapidly buried in clay sediments.

Whatever, if they were buried any considerable length of time before they would be clearly melted with the surroundings, not retaining their clear-cut shape.
And how you mean that perfectly preserved dinos' tracks (just google for them, they are plenty out there) could have been under other sediments any such periods and then appear intact on the surface is beyond me.

 

[Jan Steinman]

If you're really interested what's all this is about, read my answer to Jan Steinman below this comment of yours.

I've added akiprev to my "ignore" list, after reviewing his postings, which revealed a one-track pattern.

I suggest others do the same. Such people are only here to get a rise out of others. If we don't rise to their bait, they'll go elsewhere.

I've got no time for ignorant zealots.

 

[akiprev]

I've added akiprev to my "ignore" list, after reviewing his postings, which revealed a one-track pattern.

I suggest others do the same. Such people are only here to get a rise out of others. If we don't rise to their bait, they'll go elsewhere.

I've got no time for ignorant zealots.

C'mon Jan, you old (affirmatively) ace, just before leaving explain briefly how we find all those obnoxious intact dinos' tracks after so many millions (or it was billions?) years.