Henry C. Mercer (1896), who explored the cave and dug 2 pits in Chamber 3 in 1895, found similar ceramic and nonceramic layers. His attempt to locate preceramic artifacts with extinct fauna in association with Loltun or other nearby caves was unsuccessful. Some skeletal remains dubiously identified as Ursus (bear) were found in Loltun in a ceramic layer. Mercer reported the presence of Equus (horse) teeth and bones on the surface of three different caves. Although similar to the extinct horse Equus Occidentalis, the remains were identified as modern horse.
page 263
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Unsuccessful or swept under the rug? We need the Schmidt article or a carbon date.
Swept under the rug???? Are you KIDDING me????
Notice a pattern here. The "evidence" that FARMS comes up with is very dated and from minor texts difficult to locate. Once located or other sources regarding the issue is found, the "evidence" is not what FARMS claimed it to be - either due to a simple mistake on the part of the first archaeologists, or a misuse of the source itself. Then the insinuation that archaeologists are either incompetent or outright dishonest is trotted out, otherwise they would admit what FARMS insist is so - that there really is compelling evidence of the horse in Book of Mormon times.
The hard fact is that there is no compelling evidence, or any evidence that holds up under scrutiny, that the horse existed in Book of Mormon times. That is the reason why apologists resort to arguments like the tapir. You really think if there was really SOLID evidence of the horse in the Book of Mormon time period, they'd bother with such a painful theory?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Ok thank you... I see that... but it mysteriously ommits any infromation about ther upper 5 layers. And your book cuts off right when they get into the spanish digging "from 1970 to 1980 and beyond."
Your link cuts off right when we hit the most recent information on these caves. 1970-1980 and it starts talking about the spanish digging.
Yes, I said the link is handicapped due to limited page viewing. Are you actually suggesting that the text would proceed to claim that later research verified the link of extinct fauna to ceramic dating?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Tarski wrote:They should hire master ignoramus Kent Hovind to do some of their arguing. He uses the same style--say whatever it takes to make the believers doubt the science just enough to have an excuse to keep their cherished non-evidence based beliefs. (Oh but Hovind is in prison now--oh well)
But obviously Hovind was imprisoned becuase of prejudice towards his religion. See here.
Persecution! ;)
Last edited by Analytics on Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
beastie wrote:Why in the world would they need to specifically mention the top five layers when they already made this painfully clear statement??
His attempt to locate preceramic artifacts with extinct fauna in association with Loltun or other nearby caves was unsuccessful.
And what's with the "mysteriously"?? Is this another "ooo, archaeologists are hiding the TRUTH" insinuation?
Well heres the deal.. we have sorenson saying the first 5 layers held horse... your source is claiming that he mistook them as Bear. So some one is doing the lying.
You say its Famrs... I say it those who have their carrers staked on it. We need Schmidt.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Did you notice that "he mistook bones for bear"? who's doing the lying farms or the scientisits who has more at stake here beastie?
WTF???? Mercer WANTED to connect extinct fauna with preceramic ages...just like FARMS. This statement of yours makes ZERO sense.
But as far as who has more at stake here? Let's see, on one hand we have scientists who could take credit for overturning a long held erroneous belief, and all the attention and kudos that accompany that feat, and LDS believers who must believe in the historicity of the Book of Mormon in order to preserve their faith, their core belief, their own self definition.... oh, gee, that's really a tough one to answer. I'll have to sleep on it.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Beside now both of us are fighting over mercer. Its the 1988 Spanish Schmidt that we need to look at. Which... your book does not have. Apples and oranges.
Mercer was unsecessful at connecting animals with ceramics according to your link, but that's not what farms is saying... They are saying the spanish who dug in 1970-1980 where successful. And that's why the Schmidt find that we are missing is so important,
Last edited by Guest on Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Well heres the deal.. we have sorenson saying the first 5 layers held horse... your source is claiming they where Bear. So some one is doing the lying.
You say its Famrs... I say it those who have their carrers staked on it. We need Schmidt.
Mercer made an error. It was 1896, for heaven's sake.
And why would someone's career be staked on no horses being in the top five levels????
Are people going to be FIRED or something if new horse evidence were found?? Come ON, Zak. What happens when a scientist - in any field - makes a new, remarkable discovery?? Is his/her arse kicked to the corner???
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.