And direct dating

09-Jan-2020 10:00

In the absence of any supporting explanation for this “reverse stratigraphy,” the older dates produced for the top of the 2- to 3-m layer should be regarded with suspicion.

Hence, contrary to the authors' assertion that TPL1 has a “minimum secured age of 46 ka and a maximum age of ∼63 ka”, the published stratigraphy, if correct, indicates that the TPL1 specimen is no older than 46 ka.

Consitency david, I'll work on it I'm gonna be fucking like crazy in the next few weeks.

In this context, although the recently published modern human cranium from Tam Pa Ling, Laos (2) (i.e., TPL1), provides new anatomical data concerning AMHs in Southeast Asia, the authors’ interpretation of TPL1 as “the earliest skeletal evidence for fully modern humans in mainland Southeast Asia” is not supported by their stratigraphic data.Consequently, many men end up investing a significant amount of time, effort, and money pursuing the romantic or sexual companionship of women who have no desire other than to ‘use’ men for their own self-serving objectives.Very few men who are primarily interested in engaging in Relationship Type B with a woman have the bold courage to communicate their sexual desires, interests, and intentions to women in an upfront, specific, straightforwardly honest manner.TPL1’s status as “the earliest well-dated modern human fossil east of the Jordan Valley” also appears weak compared with the Liujiang specimen dated to ∼153 ka (3), the Callao Cave fossil in the Philippines dated to 67 ka (4), and, above all, the ∼100 ka modern fossil from Zhirendong (5), discovered only 484 km northeast of Tam Pa Ling in Southern China.Direct dating methods are increasingly applied to human fossils because stratigraphic associations between human fossils and archaeological remains and/or deposits do not always exist.

In this context, although the recently published modern human cranium from Tam Pa Ling, Laos (2) (i.e., TPL1), provides new anatomical data concerning AMHs in Southeast Asia, the authors’ interpretation of TPL1 as “the earliest skeletal evidence for fully modern humans in mainland Southeast Asia” is not supported by their stratigraphic data.Consequently, many men end up investing a significant amount of time, effort, and money pursuing the romantic or sexual companionship of women who have no desire other than to ‘use’ men for their own self-serving objectives.Very few men who are primarily interested in engaging in Relationship Type B with a woman have the bold courage to communicate their sexual desires, interests, and intentions to women in an upfront, specific, straightforwardly honest manner.TPL1’s status as “the earliest well-dated modern human fossil east of the Jordan Valley” also appears weak compared with the Liujiang specimen dated to ∼153 ka (3), the Callao Cave fossil in the Philippines dated to 67 ka (4), and, above all, the ∼100 ka modern fossil from Zhirendong (5), discovered only 484 km northeast of Tam Pa Ling in Southern China.Direct dating methods are increasingly applied to human fossils because stratigraphic associations between human fossils and archaeological remains and/or deposits do not always exist.Will this new radioisotope dating (or radiodating) technique solve the problems that plagued older dating methods?