Carbon Dating Horse Remains

[rick7475]

Has there been any more Carbon 14 dating of horse remains?

 

I recall from a few years ago there was some work on the dating by palaeontologist Wade Miller and that he found a couple of specimens from before Columbus.

[AndyDnom]

hadn't heard that  .  no one thinks that there was pre columbus horses, do they?

[katherine the great]

To my knowledge, most New World horses had died out with the other megafauna by the end of the Pleistocene.  A few Holocene horse finds have been published, but I've never seen any dated to after around 7500 bp--in Alaska.  As an archaeologist, I would be very any interested in anything published by Dr. Miller on this topic, but I've never seen any publications by him on the horse.  If he has something credible, he should quit talking about it and publish it.

[Sevenbak]

Whatever became of this?  I realize this has been dismissed by the establishment because of preconceived understanding, but this isn't the only one of its kind..  Just more food for thought...

 

[livy111us]

Here is an excerpt from Dr. Miller's book Science and The Book of Mormon:

 

“A number of Carbon-14 dates on horse fossils, especially in the United

States, show ages extending well past the close of the Pleistocene.

Ages obtained from a variety of locations are as follows (these

are all in years before the present): 8,240 (Mead and Meltzer, 1984,

p. 446); 7,000; 8,000 (Hester, 1960, p. 70); 6,160 (Marcus and Berger,

1984, p. 171); ~5,000 (Martin and Webb, 1974, p. 144); 3,800

(Schmidt, 1988, p. 253). A date of 2,167 B.C. was obtained based on

horse bones from the northern part of the Yucatan Peninsula according

to John L. Sorenson (Pers. Comm.)… Some of the unpublished dates run on horse fossils that appear

to be valid are: 5,890 B.C. (Pratt Cave in Texas); 830 B.C. (southern

Saskatchewan, Canada); 815 A.D. (Ontario, Canada); 1,260-1,400

A.D. (Wolf Spider Cave, Colorado). A date of about 1,120 B.C. was

determined using a thermoluminescence method on a horse bone from

Horsethief Cave in Wyoming. While these dates are important, it

will take a number of others in this age range to convince skeptics

that the horse did continue in North America past the Pleistocene

into historic times. In my opinion these dates eventually will come. Reported dates less than 10,000 years before the present for

horse fossils are unfortunately not yet common, but reports discussing

primitive man in association with the horse and *** in North America are. Many scientific articles have been written about this

association in both North and Central America. Mesoamerica especially

has a rich literature on this subject. Some of these articles date

back to the 1800’s (e.g., Heilprin, 1891; Mercer, 1896). Different

species of Equus associated with man were reported by Mexican

paleontologists Joaquin Arroyo-Cabrales and Oscar Polaco from several

caves in the Yucatan Peninsula (2003, p. 273-288). A number of

sites having a joint occurrence of horse and man have been reported

throughout Mexico, though dates are often lacking (e.g., Irwin-Williams,

1967; MacNeish and Nelken-Terner, 1983; Pichardo, 2000b)” Science and The Book of Mormon, Wade Miller, pg 80-83)

[katherine the great]

Here is an excerpt from Dr. Miller's book Science and The Book of Mormon:

 

“A number of Carbon-14 dates on horse fossils, especially in the United

States, show ages extending well past the close of the Pleistocene.

Ages obtained from a variety of locations are as follows (these

are all in years before the present): 8,240 (Mead and Meltzer, 1984,

p. 446); 7,000; 8,000 (Hester, 1960, p. 70); 6,160 (Marcus and Berger,

1984, p. 171); ~5,000 (Martin and Webb, 1974, p. 144); 3,800

(Schmidt, 1988, p. 253). A date of 2,167 B.C. was obtained based on

horse bones from the northern part of the Yucatan Peninsula according

to John L. Sorenson (Pers. Comm.)… Some of the unpublished dates run on horse fossils that appear

to be valid are: 5,890 B.C. (Pratt Cave in Texas); 830 B.C. (southern

Saskatchewan, Canada); 815 A.D. (Ontario, Canada); 1,260-1,400

A.D. (Wolf Spider Cave, Colorado). A date of about 1,120 B.C. was

determined using a thermoluminescence method on a horse bone from

Horsethief Cave in Wyoming.

Okay this is just goofy.  If these unpublished dates appear to be valid, then why on earth don't they just PUBLISH them?  (Thermoluminescence dating on bone?  That's pretty goofy too...)

[rick7475]

Okay this is just goofy.  If these unpublished dates appear to be valid, then why on earth don't they just PUBLISH them?  (Thermoluminescence dating on bone?  That's pretty goofy too...)

 

 

I understand he is trying to find more specimens. Also, this would be a paradigm shift in the field of North American Archaeology, If anyone has studied this type of business model (in archaeology you have to present a business case to get funding, or pay for it yourself) it can take decades for acceptance even with over-whelming proof. Right now, he has a tiny bit of proof, but not enough to even start the paradigm shift from A to B.   

[katherine the great]

I understand he is trying to find more specimens. Also, this would be a paradigm shift in the field of North American Archaeology, If anyone has studied this type of business model (in archaeology you have to present a business case to get funding, or pay for it yourself) it can take decades for acceptance even with over-whelming proof. Right now, he has a tiny bit of proof, but not enough to even start the paradigm shift from A to B.   

You don't need a paradigm shift to publish.  Publishing is what begins paradigm shifts.  (I'm a working archaeologist BTW.)  If he has some dates that are reliable (as he states), and has solid data to back them up, he should publish them and get the ball rolling. Publications with solid data will be what gets the funding for further research, and he sounds well connected. Until then, of course critics are not going to take the idea seriously.  Seriously.    If this man's data is as good as he presents it to be and he's a former BYU professor, I'm surprised that BYU hasn't jumped on this.  They certainly have the funds to do something with it.  I have to wonder about what techniques he used to date them or if he actually dated the bones themselves or some pottery sherds found in connection with them.  

[rick7475]

Well, John L. Sorenson has taken him seriously in his latest book Mormon Codex. Though he does qualify the reference by indicating the work is unpublished. Since Mr. Miller has posted articles on Fair I wonder if anyone here knows him personally or even if he posts here. His article seemed quite informative, though there were some leaps. 

 

I'll look for the thread, but I do recall this discussion before, and I thought there were more carbon dated samples, though they could be from the same study.

[livy111us]

He does plan on publishing his findings which *I believe* are in addition to what is posted above. There are a lot of health issues that have been slowing him down greatly but when he has time he is continuing his research. He is also building a strong case for horses in pre-Columbian America (post 10,000 BC) and wants more evidence than he currently has before he publishes. He is hooked up with only a few field archaeologist's right now who inform him when they come across bones that are good candidates to be carbon dated. Katherine, if you or any other archaeologist come across horse bones that meet certain qualifications, I am sure he would be more than happy to get them carbon dated. I'm also fairly certain that BYU is funding this project as well. But he is a lone ranger and doesn't have any help which doesn't help speed up the process at all. 

[katherine the great]

He does plan on publishing his findings which *I believe* are in addition to what is posted above. There are a lot of health issues that have been slowing him down greatly but when he has time he is continuing his research. He is also building a strong case for horses in pre-Columbian America (post 10,000 BC) and wants more evidence than he currently has before he publishes. He is hooked up with only a few field archaeologist's right now who inform him when they come across bones that are good candidates to be carbon dated. Katherine, if you or any other archaeologist come across horse bones that meet certain qualifications, I am sure he would be more than happy to get them carbon dated. I'm also fairly certain that BYU is funding this project as well. But he is a lone ranger and doesn't have any help which doesn't help speed up the process at all. 

Sounds good.  I look forward to seeing where this goes.

[Robert F. Smith]

You don't need a paradigm shift to publish.  Publishing is what begins paradigm shifts.  (I'm a working archaeologist BTW.)  If he has some dates that are reliable (as he states), and has solid data to back them up, he should publish them and get the ball rolling. Publications with solid data will be what gets the funding for further research, and he sounds well connected. Until then, of course critics are not going to take the idea seriously.  Seriously.    If this man's data is as good as he presents it to be and he's a former BYU professor, I'm surprised that BYU hasn't jumped on this.  They certainly have the funds to do something with it.  I have to wonder about what techniques he used to date them or if he actually dated the bones themselves or some pottery sherds found in connection with them.  

BYU does not now and has never supported archeological research designed to prove the Book of Mormon.  That would only poison the wells.  The Brethren themselves insisted on this written proviso when they contributed monies to the New World Archaeological Foundation, beginning in the 1950s.

 

As to the dates Miller has put in his book, they were published by others (non-Mormons).  He has simply gathered them in one place for convenience.

 

The greatest promise for discovering "rare, late-surviving populations of . . . horse in different parts of North America" is through sedaDNA work (James Haile, et al., “Ancient DNA reveals late survival of mammoth and horse in interior Alaska,” PNAS, Dec 17, 2009, online at http://www.pnas.org/content/106/52/22352.full ).

 

See Steven E. Jones (BYU physicist), “Were There Horses in the Americas Before Columbus?” Ancient American, 16 #95 (June 2012), 2-3, online at  http://www.bluetoad.com/publication/index.php?i=115319&m=&l=&p=2&pre=&ver=swf

–no equus samples from Mesoamerica from 14,700 BC - 1,650 AD.

–equus in Pratt Cave (near El Paso), Texas, from ca. 6,020 - 5,890 BC.

–equus in Wolf Spider Cave, Colorado, from 1,260 - 1,400 AD

–equus in Horsethief Cave, Wyoming, ca. 1,100 BC

–equus bone in Wyoming, ca. 1,426 - 1,481 AD

–equus bones in Canada, from 900 BC (Sask, Ridell I-8581), and 1,100 AD (Ontario, Hemlock Park Farm)

Jones concludes that the DNA of these samples needs to be tested to determine whether they are in any way related to horses brought over by the Spanish.

[AndyDnom]

people sure talk about the Mormon Codex book a lot . is it any good? what is a codex?

[katherine the great]

 

BYU does not now and has never supported archeological research designed to prove the Book of Mormon.  That would only poison the wells.  The Brethren themselves insisted on this written proviso when they contributed monies to the New World Archaeological Foundation, beginning in the 1950s.

 

As to the dates Miller has put in his book, they were published by others (non-Mormons).  He has simply gathered them in one place for convenience.

 

 

Fair enough on the BYU issue.  It makes sense.  As to the dates, I was referring specifically to the list of unpublished dates he put in his book that he said seemed "reliable."  Ancient American, while interesting, is pop-science (their words--not mine.)  It is not a scholarly publication and is not held to the same academic standards.  I don't think of it as any different than the book Dr. Miller himself published for the general public. Anyone can say anything they want without careful documentation. With the exception of the 3800 bp date by Schmidt, the middle Holocene dates he cited from publications seem more recent than would be expected, but not shocking like the 2167 date from the Yucatan (obtained by personal communication from Sorenson?), and the 9th Century B.C. dates from Canada.  If these can be found in a scholarly publication, dating techniques used, protocol for preparing the bone for the testing, the name of the testing facilities--preferably three, results with margin of error, etc are documented (you probably know all this), and then there can be no question.  Without this type of rigorous standard, these dates, even if 100% accurate, will be dismissed outright by the scientific community--and rightfully so.

[Palerider]

As a note of interest, I was watching NatGeo? or was it Discovery channel? the other day and they were studying how the size/territory of the ancient empires was restricted by the abilities of the government to send communication and control/move their armies.

 

Specific mention was made  of the Persian Empire and Alexander the Great, the Roman empire and the Mongol which were huge. All of these empires had the horse which greatly extended their abilities and speed of communication.

 

The reason there were no similar "empires" in the Americas was because the Olmec, Mayan, Aztec (which were smaller by comparison with the old world) didn't have the horse to increase their ability to expand.

 

I'm just sayin'............

Edited December 1, 2013 by Palerider

[thesometimesaint]

As a note of interest, I was watching NatGeo? or was it Discovery channel? the other day and they were studying how the size/territory of the ancient empires was restricted by the abilities of the government to send communication and control/move their armies.

 

Specific mention was made  of the Persian Empire and Alexander the Great, the Roman empire and the Mongol which were huge. All of these empires had the horse which greatly extended their abilities and speed of communication.

 

The reason there were no similar "empires" in the Americas was because the Olmec, Mayan, Aztec (which were smaller by comparison with the old world) didn't have the horse to increase their ability to expand.

 

I'm just sayin'............

 

While about a third the size of the Roman Empire the Inca empire was pretty big too, they didn't have the horse.

[Palerider]

While about a third the size of the Roman Empire the Inca empire was pretty big too, they didn't have the horse.

 

Exactly. Think of what the Inca might have done with the horse.

 

One people they did mention that actually began to expand their territory exponentially were the Commanche after the introduction of the horse to the Americas.

 

If white settlers and military who had the horse in addition to the technology of metallurgy (guns) hadn't come along who knows how far the Commanche would have gone.

[rick7475]

You are assuming horses in Mesoamerica were used for riding, which they were not, nor in the Book of Mormon.

[livy111us]

Katherine,

I just heard back from Wade after sending him your comments and this was his reply

 

He's right in the comments made [i wasn't clear that you were a female, sorry!] . It will take several C-14 dates with all the documentation to go with them in order to convince the scientific community. I'm just sorry that the recent material I've sent in for dating hasn't been successful. Each time I was told there was not sufficient collagen in the samples. I'm wondering if another lab has better equipment/techniques for this. It has been frustrating. I've recently been told of some horse material near Merida (Yucatan Peninsula) that I can examine. If possible I want to get there the first part of next year.
 
Wade

[rick7475]

Thanks for the update. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Fair enough on the BYU issue.  It makes sense.  As to the dates, I was referring specifically to the list of unpublished dates he put in his book that he said seemed "reliable."  Ancient American, while interesting, is pop-science (their words--not mine.)  It is not a scholarly publication and is not held to the same academic standards.  I don't think of it as any different than the book Dr. Miller himself published for the general public. Anyone can say anything they want without careful documentation. With the exception of the 3800 bp date by Schmidt, the middle Holocene dates he cited from publications seem more recent than would be expected, but not shocking like the 2167 date from the Yucatan (obtained by personal communication from Sorenson?), and the 9th Century B.C. dates from Canada.  If these can be found in a scholarly publication, dating techniques used, protocol for preparing the bone for the testing, the name of the testing facilities--preferably three, results with margin of error, etc are documented (you probably know all this), and then there can be no question.  Without this type of rigorous standard, these dates, even if 100% accurate, will be dismissed outright by the scientific community--and rightfully so.

I agree with all you say here, Katherine, and just now leafing through the relevant pages of Sorenson's Mormon's Codex (315-318), I see that FARMS had funded an effort to date all those bones.  Some could not be located.  But three of the ones which could be found and tested gave dates of 830 B.C., 815 A.D., and 1260-1400 A.D., and paleontologist Wade Miller plans to publish those and some others in a scientific report.  I have no idea when or if that will take place, but since FARMS no longer exists, and with funding at a premium these days, I have my doubts.

[Robert F. Smith]

people sure talk about the Mormon Codex book a lot . is it any good? what is a codex?

The book is excellent, and you can probably get a good deal on one from Deseret Book during this Xmas season.  Go online and check.

 

A Codex is an ancient book, only about four of which are known from Mesoamerica (the Spanish burned all the rest).  Many more are known from the Mediterranean area.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Robert F. Smith

[Palerider]

You are assuming horses in Mesoamerica were used for riding, which they were not, nor in the Book of Mormon.

 

I'm sure you're right. I even doubt they were used at all....

 

But I think the church thought they were for riding and usually, in training horses, riding come before training for chariots, which as we see, was a part of the Book of Mormon story. And then there are always those pesky illustrations some of which were approved by the church..... 

 

But regardless of which were approved and which were not, it is more than obvious that it is generally thought by LDS that horses were ridden in the BOM.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 2, 2013 by Palerider

[Sevenbak]

I'm sure you're right. I even doubt they were used at all....

I don't understand this theory.  Nephi and company state they found horses upon arrival in the promised land, and they came from a society that used them extensively, and we can only rightly assume that they knew what they were for.  Why wouldn't they use them for riding?

Edited December 2, 2013 by Sevenbak

[katherine the great]

I don't understand this theory.  Nephi and company state they found horses upon arrival in the promised land, and they came from a society that used them extensively, and we can only rightly assume that they knew what they were for.  Why wouldn't they use them for riding?

Horses were used as a food source long before they were used for transportation.