Re: Dating of 1470

Jim Foley (jimf@vangelis.FtCollins.NCR.com)
11 Jul 1995 18:36:13 GMT

In article <hazlets.805336618@wizvax>,
Samuel H Hazleton V <hazlets@wizvax.wizvax.net> wrote:

>I understand that KNM-ER 1470 was originally dated at 2.9 million years
>by Richard Leakey due to separate analyses that agreed (Fitch & Miller,
>Maglio)
>Why were these analyses rejected? What led to the consensus for the present
>dating of 1.8 million years?

More tests, and particularly the evidence of faunal comparisons. For
details, see:

Lewin R.: Bones of contention: controversies in the search for human
origins, New York:Simon and Schuster, 1987. (discusses in detail some
of the major controversies that have occurred in paleoanthropology)

Johanson D.C. and Edey M.A.: Lucy: the beginnings of humankind, New
York:Simon and Schuster, 1981. pp. 1-409. (a short history of
paleoanthropology, and the discovery and analysis of Australopithecus
afarensis)

For an alternative viewpoint, from a creationist, see:

Lubenow M.L.: Bones of contention: a creationist assessment of human
fossils, Grand Rapids,MI:Baker Books, 1992. (the best creationist book
on human fossils)

--

Jim (Chris) Foley,                 jim.foley@symbios.com

Assoc. Prof. of Omphalic Envy      Research interest:

Department of Anthropology         Primitive hominids

University of Ediacara             (Australopithecus creationistii)