norseman Posted September 1, 2022 Admin Share Posted September 1, 2022 https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRPffuD1/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenesRUs Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 The human branch of evolutionary history didn't begin until approximately 7 million years ago. Not 200 million years ago. Maybe the authors of this information were a "little off' by 2 orders of magnitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted October 13, 2022 Share Posted October 13, 2022 Dinosaur center toe in the mud on some prints can give a look of a human-like foot in some fossilized mud beds. For the most part, science seems to have some pretty good non-human explanations. Many of these things thought to be human are about as much of a stretch as the Slocum Bigfoot body cast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodler Posted October 19, 2022 Share Posted October 19, 2022 I don't know about this individual claim because, as a computer guy, I will never click through to ticktock :-) but I've heard coinciding footprints explained by erosion to a layer containing dinosaur footprints and redepositing of sediment over the top, in which anatomically modern humans have stepped. It appears the human footprint is in the same layer as the dino print, when in fact they're 100M years apart. Is this claim different, they're claiming a human footprint is fount in sedimentary deposits dated 200M years ago? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixarcs Posted October 20, 2022 Share Posted October 20, 2022 I don't know why, I just have a hard time believing anything from tiktok. It could be a video about the sky being blue on a sunny day and I'd probably still raise an eyebrow. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted October 24, 2022 Admin Author Share Posted October 24, 2022 On 10/12/2022 at 11:25 PM, GenesRUs said: The human branch of evolutionary history didn't begin until approximately 7 million years ago. Not 200 million years ago. Maybe the authors of this information were a "little off' by 2 orders of magnitude. Thats the whole point of this anomaly. And it isn’t “information”…. it’s a fossilized footprint. So either the testing is wrong. The interpretation is wrong. Or our understanding of human evolution is wrong. Also if it’s very old? What is it doing in North America? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted October 24, 2022 Admin Author Share Posted October 24, 2022 On 10/19/2022 at 2:34 PM, Doodler said: I don't know about this individual claim because, as a computer guy, I will never click through to ticktock :-) but I've heard coinciding footprints explained by erosion to a layer containing dinosaur footprints and redepositing of sediment over the top, in which anatomically modern humans have stepped. It appears the human footprint is in the same layer as the dino print, when in fact they're 100M years apart. Is this claim different, they're claiming a human footprint is fount in sedimentary deposits dated 200M years ago? Your going to have to run that by me again…. Dino steps on wet sand. After millions of years the sand becomes stone and is covered by over burden. Then erosion happens, exposing the stone…. Human steps on stone. Which would not leave a track to be fossilized? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodler Posted October 27, 2022 Share Posted October 27, 2022 On 10/24/2022 at 3:42 PM, norseman said: Your going to have to run that by me again…. Dino steps on wet sand. After millions of years the sand becomes stone and is covered by over burden. Then erosion happens, exposing the stone…. Human steps on stone. Which would not leave a track to be fossilized? Dino steps on wet sand/mud. More mud/sand covers that. Millions of years pass, turns to stone. Millions more years pass, wears down to somewhere near the dino print. Covered by mud again. Man comes along, steps in mud. More mud deposited over the whole area. Hundreds of thousands of years passes. Wears down exposing both man print and dino print. That's the working theory for those where dino prints are in the same area as man prints. They aren't in the same layer, they're in adjacent layers laid down millions of years apart. This is almost as convoluted like the whole Jurassic Park quote: God creates dinosaurs God kills dinosaurs God creates man Man creates dinosaurs Dinosaurs eat man Women rule the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted October 27, 2022 Admin Author Share Posted October 27, 2022 42 minutes ago, Doodler said: Dino steps on wet sand/mud. More mud/sand covers that. Millions of years pass, turns to stone. Millions more years pass, wears down to somewhere near the dino print. Covered by mud again. Man comes along, steps in mud. More mud deposited over the whole area. Hundreds of thousands of years passes. Wears down exposing both man print and dino print. That's the working theory for those where dino prints are in the same area as man prints. They aren't in the same layer, they're in adjacent layers laid down millions of years apart. This is almost as convoluted like the whole Jurassic Park quote: God creates dinosaurs God kills dinosaurs God creates man Man creates dinosaurs Dinosaurs eat man Women rule the world My confusion is that science can date stone supposedly. So it not only should be able to tell the dino and human print are not on the same layer? The same deposit? They should be able to age the two deposits as well. Which would quickly tell us the two prints are 65 million years apart or whatever. What Ive read is this is not always the case. I don't have a dog in the fight either way. Maybe time travelers from the future were enjoying a Jurassic beach? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catmandoo Posted October 27, 2022 Share Posted October 27, 2022 Erosion in nature can be confusing. Where is the trackway of dinosaur prints? Only 'Bigfoots' leave single tracks. I am not posting that the track(s) were faked. Remember the story about the town in Texas that created a tourist trap during the depression era? To boost tourism income, they faked human tracks alongside dino tracks. They also sold moon shine. Possibly was a fun town in that era. Moon shine sold better than snake oil. My all time favorite from years ago was 'human' tracks in granite. Looked good on the internet but granite has to be a couple thousand degrees Fahrenheit to receive an imprint. The answers are not going to come from social media displays that fade away quickly. Are they selling moon shine in Harlan Kentucky? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted October 28, 2022 Share Posted October 28, 2022 Paleontologists often struggle to date any given strait of geologic rock. They would be the first to tell you that fact. You're welcome to be skeptical of any individual scientific finding. But if you're skeptical of all paleontological finding, you're a Luddite. It's a pity Noah wasn't successful in preserving unicorns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted October 28, 2022 Admin Author Share Posted October 28, 2022 33 minutes ago, Incorrigible1 said: Paleontologists often struggle to date any given strait of geologic rock. They would be the first to tell you that fact. You're welcome to be skeptical of any individual scientific finding. But if you're skeptical of all paleontological finding, you're a Luddite. It's a pity Noah wasn't successful in preserving unicorns. I’ve watched this with some interest as it’s close to my daughters house. https://www.nps.gov/whsa/learn/nature/fossilized-footprints.htm I was under the impression they had this dialed in pretty tight. But I guess they were carbon dating seeds. And not the rock itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted October 28, 2022 Share Posted October 28, 2022 They use seeds, pollen, and other indicators of known age above and below the target specimen to help provide geologic age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted October 28, 2022 Admin Author Share Posted October 28, 2022 9 minutes ago, Incorrigible1 said: They use seeds, pollen, and other indicators of known age above and below the target specimen to help provide geologic age. So honest question. If none of those things are present? How do they know how old a T. rex track is? They seem to know the time frame that they existed. But is the track 65 million years old? 70 million? 75 million? Etc? I was under the impression they were aging the rock itself. I guess that’s not right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted October 28, 2022 Share Posted October 28, 2022 In such a case, the age estimation would widen. It's science (little "s",) it questions itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts