> In general paleo people did not live
>> long
>> enough to
>snip
>>
>> -gts
>>
>This comment keeps showing up in this list, but is there any real evidence
>for it?
>Consider the reported problems with recent archaeological dating methods.
>
>William
>

I agree 100%. Carbon 14 dating relies totally on the amount of carbon in the
atmosphere. The reading this is based on has been taken from the modern world
with all its pollutants. How do they know that carbon in paleo times was the
same as today? They don't and that would throw carbon 14 dating techniques
right off. Also, all bones are anlaysed from the stance of modern medicine,
how do they know that the '40' year old man riddled with arthritis is not
actually 100 years old, but fared better than modern man.

In respect of life expectancy from 100/200 etc years ago. They work this out
by including infant mortality - which needless to say was very high. All those
day old babies and year old children ignores the fact that once through
childhood health and life expectancy was a lot higher than even today.
Granted, those that lived in an urban setting were much more likely to succumb
to the ills of malnutrition and bad food additives (yes this has been going on
for a long long time). Those in the country eating the food they grew and
caught, despite famine years had a very good life expectancy. A look through
our graveyard here shows that anyone who escaped the childhood ills and
accidents such as being gored by deer, or drowned had a very long life
expectancy and many are recorded in the 100's. Of course life expectancy has
gone up in the modern world, child hood mortality has dropped considerably.

Life expectancy is a statistic. And we all know that there are three kinds of
lies. Lies, more lies and statistics.

Fran

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
       Get your free @ecosse.net account
             http://www.ecosse.net
   Scotland's Free Internet Service Provider
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *