No paleontologists involved here. The article also isn't about forcing people to admit they're wrong, because preclovis is already widely accepted. It's about the tension in meeting the extremely high standard of evidence for that claim against the reality of the site's fragility and destruction.
Comments
No paleontologists involved here. The article also isn't about forcing people to admit they're wrong, because preclovis is already widely accepted. It's about the tension in meeting the extremely high standard of evidence for that claim against the reality of the site's fragility and destruction.