https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh5007
5 Oct 2023
Independent age estimates resolve the controversy of
ancient human footprints at White Sands

Abstract
Human footprints at White Sands National Park, New
Mexico, USA, reportedly date to between ~23,000 and
21,000 years ago according to radiocarbon dating of
seeds from the aquatic plant Ruppia cirrhosa. These
ages remain controversial because of potential old
carbon reservoir effects that could compromise their
accuracy. We present new calibrated 14C ages of
terrestrial pollen collected from the same
stratigraphic horizons as those of the Ruppia seeds,
along with optically stimulated luminescence ages of
sediments from within the human footprint–bearing
sequence, to evaluate the veracity of the seed ages.
The results show that the chronologic framework
originally established for the White Sands
footprints is robust and reaffirm that humans were
present in North America during the Last Glacial
Maximum.

Primum Sapienti wrote:
> https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh5007
> 5 Oct 2023

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4650307.stm
Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 July, 2005, 10:17 GMT 11:17 UK

The good Doctor posted that.. 18 years ago.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/730359491090169856

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>> https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh5007
>> 5 Oct 2023
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4650307.stm
> Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 July, 2005, 10:17 GMT 11:17 UK
>
> The good Doctor posted that.. 18 years ago.

No, the supposed doc didn't. Different site. In fact,
different countries. I posted about White Sands, New
Mexico. The BBC link is for a site near Puebla,
Mexico (which the BBC link says is 80 miles south
east of Mexico City. The two sites are around *1300
miles* apart. That's one thousand three hundred miles.

<https://www.google.com/search?q=distance+%22white+sands%22+%22new+mexico%22+puebla+mexico&sca_esv=571789629&source=hp&ei=nVAjZZyuD9Wb0PEP8KqtuAI&iflsig=AO6bgOgAAAAAZSNerf09ygaAgBgqEglirB5h6jzLwO3S&ved=0ahUKEwjc8M3m4eeBAxXVDTQIHXBVCycQ4dUDCAw&uact=5&oq=distance+%22white+sands%22+%22new+mexico%22+puebla+mexico&gs_lp=Egdnd3Mtd2l6GgIYAiIxZGlzdGFuY2UgIndoaXRlIHNhbmRzIiAibmV3IG1leGljbyIgcHVlYmxhIG1leGljbzIFECEYqwJIobYBUABYiLQBcAB4AJABAJgB6gGgAeEcqgEGMC4yMi4yuAEDyAEA-AEB-AECwgILEC4YgAQYsQMYgwHCAgsQLhiKBRixAxiDAcICERAuGIAEGLEDGIMBGMcBGNEDwgIFEAAYgATCAgsQABiABBixAxiDAcICDhAuGIAEGLEDGMcBGNEDwgILEAAYigUYsQMYgwHCAggQABiABBixA8ICDhAAGIAEGLEDGIMBGMkDwgIIEAAYigUYkgPCAhEQLhiDARjHARixAxjRAxiABMICCBAuGIAEGLEDwgIGEAAYFhgewgIIEAAYigUYhgPCAggQIRigARiLA8ICCBAhGKsCGIsDwgILECEYFhgeGB0YiwPCAggQIRgWGB4YHcICBRAhGKAB&sclient=gws-wiz>

Or use the search terms:

distance "white sands" "new mexico" puebla mexico

Now, for those of who for whom English is our first
language, note that the subject line says "reaffirmed".

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adh5007
5 Oct 2023
Independent age estimates resolve the controversy of
ancient human footprints at White Sands

Abstract
Human footprints at White Sands National Park, New
Mexico, USA, reportedly date to between ~23,000 and
21,000 years ago according to radiocarbon dating of
seeds from the aquatic plant Ruppia cirrhosa. These
ages remain controversial because of potential old
carbon reservoir effects that could compromise their
accuracy. We present new calibrated 14C ages of
terrestrial pollen collected from the same
stratigraphic horizons as those of the Ruppia seeds,
along with optically stimulated luminescence ages of
sediments from within the human footprint–bearing
sequence, to evaluate the veracity of the seed ages.
The results show that the chronologic framework
originally established for the White Sands
footprints is robust and reaffirm that humans were
present in North America during the Last Glacial
Maximum.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/affirm

IOW, the dating is solid.

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> No, the supposed doc didn't. Different site. In fact,
> different countries. I posted about White Sands, New
> Mexico.

#1. They did not share your concept of borders.

#2. Rudimentary math. Try to figure out which came
first. The point is, and I understand it's wasted in you
but, the point is that once something is established
you move on.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/729273087843008512