Last week, science writer Christopher Plain published a story in The Bectrief (described its subject as “rebellious curious science, technology, and defense”) involving fossil human footprints found in the dry white sand lake beds of New Mexico. [emphasis, links added]
According to this article, radiocarbon dating brings the footprint to a 23,000-year-old age.
This will be in the “last glacier maximum” – glaciers are at the maximum level in North America, Nordic and Asiaand 10,000 years ago More modern theorists claim that humans are in the Americas.
This discovery not only fundamentally changed our view of ancient ethnic migration. It provides another warning that it does not rely on so-called “settlement science.”
Consider the quote for this article:
“For much of the 19th and early 20th centuries, archaeologists believed that humans could not reach the Americas until 3,000-4,000 years ago. In the late 1920s, archaeological discoveries were found on sites such as Folsom and Clovis in New Mexico, the most common date in thousands of years, the most common date for humans, which is a range of all ranges. Bournemouth University and the U.S. National Park Service unearthed a series of human footprints on white sand beaches, dating back to 21,000 to 23,000 years ago.”
This article cites the U.S. Geological Survey geologist Jeff Pigati, as well as Vance Holliday, a professor of anthropology and geology, and Jason Windingstad, a doctoral student, from the University of Arizona, whose (separate) studies confirm the date of human footprints.
Windingstad acknowledges,
“It's a weird feeling when you go out and look at the footprints and see them in person. You realize that it basically contradicts everything you teach about what the people in North America teach.”
This contradiction shocked experts in the field. Despite 55 separate carbon date tests on footprints and surrounding materials, the scholars’ new conclusions “still be very controversial because they seem to run counter to a relatively good timeline,” Common writes.
That's it Real Science works: Even the most “established” theories can be questioned.
Although defenders of the status quo will ask for (a lot of) evidence, we “know” Will be Change when new information proves the old thinking wrong way.
But when science is bounded by political boundaries, the process of science becomes very rigid, intolerant and dangerous.
The problem is no longer allowed, because now it is more than just some obscure academic pet theory. It's a policy target platform where the entire party is seeking to force the public's throat (If this may be the case, or enter other parts of its body).
I (and others) have written about this before. In 2017, I wrote “Mart Butter Can Teach Us About Climate Change,” an article about Dr. Paul Offit’s book, Pandora’s Laboratory: The Stories of Seven Stories of Science.
The government chose to block consumption of dairy products rather than based on defective and incomplete information and harmful health consequences.
Two years later, I wrote another article explaining how governments around the world demanded murder of fear and false predictions of “population explosions”, forced abortions and promote infanticide.
In 2022, John Hinderaker of Powerline blog wrote a series of articles about how the Sri Lankan president decided to ban synthetic fertilizers (for the purpose of achieving the “climate change” goal, of course), resulting in the collapse of the country’s agriculture and its economy.
After months of food, heating oil and other essentials, Sri Lankans rushed into the presidential palace in Colombo and forced their president to flee the country in military planes.
A dead giveaway from political hijacking academic inquiry is the term “settled science.”
…Sniper…
The “science” surrounding “climate change” has not been “solved”. That Climate change is certain (only required to surpass glaciers 20,000 years ago); to what extent Human activities Change is not.
When I was in high school, we were warned of “the coming ice age.” By the time I was in law school, this was “global warming.” The predictions about “ozone pores” and Antarctic ice are wrong.
“Science” is a processnot the result. If the consequences of your assumptions are not eliminated as you expected, then your assumptions are wrong.
The footprint of White Sands in New Mexico tells us that we were wrong about migration from Asia to the Americas before.
The footprint of “Settled Science” shows us that politicians who link pet policy to scientific theory are almost always Wrong.
H/T Steve b
Read the full post in the Patriot Post
