Archaeologica.org

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 021507.php

Note this:

Dr. Ruth Dickau, a post-doctoral researcher in the U of C's department of archaeology, has used a new technique called starch grain analysis to recover microscopic residues of plants directly off the stone tools that people were using in Panama 3,000 to 7,800 years ago.

Charlie is quoting dates in excess of 18 times that ... I guess the chances of recovering microscopic residues lessen with the passage of time and more so if they are being "washed" in the river.

Just a thought.

Charlie is quoting dates in excess of 18 times that ... I guess the chances of recovering microscopic residues lessen with the passage of time and more so if they are being "washed" in the river.

Agreed Many.

That was also the deciding factor in not taking Monk's offer to destructively analyze slag nodules. I think carbonate has pretty much replaced the original chemical matrix. I do appreciate the offer to help, Monk! Don't get me wrong.

That being said, I respect this researcher's desire to come up with novel ways to scientifically date previously undateable material, along with analyzing a host of human behaviors at the time.

20 years ago we couldn't date much of anything. Let them refine their techniques and if, in the meantime, you come across something with an edge that looks as if it has been worn down by use, bag it and put it aside.

20 years ago we couldn't date much of anything. Let them refine their techniques and if, in the meantime, you come across something with an edge that looks as if it has been worn down by use, bag it and put it aside.

You can bet I got a good stash of specimens awaiting analyses.

20 years ago we couldn't date much of anything. Let them refine their techniques and if, in the meantime, you come across something with an edge that looks as if it has been worn down by use, bag it and put it aside.

Excellent advice. We are already at the point where the organic residue can be genetically sequenced ... but it costs $6,000. However, that cost is peanuts when the point is found in 250,000 year old strata in the Americas.

Charlie Hatchett wrote:That was also the deciding factor in not taking Monk's offer to destructively analyze slag nodules. I think carbonate has pretty much replaced the original chemical matrix. I do appreciate the offer to help, Monk! Don't get me wrong.

No skin off my nose Charley. I was only going to tell you what chemicals were there and in what proportions. I can't date anything.

Cognito wrote:

20 years ago we couldn't date much of anything. Let them refine their techniques and if, in the meantime, you come across something with an edge that looks as if it has been worn down by use, bag it and put it aside.

Excellent advice. We are already at the point where the organic residue can be genetically sequenced ... but it costs $6,000. However, that cost is peanuts when the point is found in 250,000 year old strata in the Americas.

Shit....Mrs. Charlie could raise that $6,000 with a bake sale!

No skin off my nose Charley. I was only going to tell you what chemicals were there and in what proportions. I can't date anything.

I appreciate the offer. I've just come to the conclusion that the specimens will be more valuable as dating specimens. Now after the dating is performed, it would be interesting to analyze a couple to see if traces of chemicals remain.