[beanbag]

i read this nat geo article earlier today, which i found frustratingly scarce on info, and very intriguing. it's scarce because they're still digging up info (ha. no pun intended, but i'll keep it) and i am curious to see how this develops further.

Ice Age Predators Found Alongside Oldest Human in Americas

i guess i am mostly curious about the coexistence of humans and predators, since i tend to think of them as more separate. i mean, if i were living during the ice age, i'd want to keep my distance from predators, personally.

and, if you're interested, here's an article previously published on the same remains:

Most Complete Ice Age Skeleton Helps Solve Mystery of First Americans

[Homer Simpson]

Maybe early humans domesticated saber-tooth cats.

[Leboman]

[beanbag]

well i am pretty sure my cat frank is a direct descendant of the saber-toothed tiger, so..

haha.

something that has always confounded me are dating techniques. i took some archaeology classes in college, and i remember talking about radiocarbon dating, and how it has a half-life of however many thousands of years, and i remember wondering how on earth we even know what the half-life is, because i believe it exceeds anything we could reliably date from known/written history. maybe someone way smarter than me could explain it, but i always struggled with that concept.

like, it makes me wonder--are the remains really 13,000 years old? what if they are 6,000 years old? or 60,000?

[Leboman]

Originally Posted by beanbag

well i am pretty sure my cat frank is a direct descendant of the saber-toothed tiger, so..

haha.

something that has always confounded me are dating techniques. i took some archaeology classes in college, and i remember talking about radiocarbon dating, and how it has a half-life of however many thousands of years, and i remember wondering how on earth we even know what the half-life is, because i believe it exceeds anything we could reliably date from known/written history. maybe someone way smarter than me could explain it, but i always struggled with that concept.

like, it makes me wonder--are the remains really 13,000 years old? what if they are 6,000 years old? or 60,000?

It is also important to remember that Radiocarbon dating is only accurate when dealing with things dating between 60,000 years to 1,200 years ago. Anything older or younger is not going to be reliable.

THIS is an interesting little article.

[beanbag]

that is interesting, thank you for sharing!