Carbon fourteen dating definition dating someone with a disability
They’re in the business of making fake things, after all. Big money seems to have been made, so it was no big deal to pay a few persons to act like they were Civil War soldiers and pay somebody else to make the photo, of those men, look old. But that photo has an entirely different origin than what is now called “Ptp” . Paiva and I have declared to be a genuine modern pterosaur. There seems to be no end of refutations for the “hoax hypothesis,” as it has been called.Does it not seem likely that they would have assumed that it was fake? In other words, if a lot of money can be made by making things that are fake, some people will make fake things. ”The photograph now called “Ptp” has been around for a long time, possibly in one or more books in the mid-20th century, according to a number of persons who report remembering it. We are serious about our declaration that this photograph (Ptp) has a valid image of a real animal. Statistics from years of eyewitness sighting reports disprove any generalized hoax explanation, for the degree of certainty in descriptions of featherlessness (if “featherlessness” is a word) fly in the face of those skeptics who use the word “hoax.” The new book has a photograph of an extant pterosaur, verified by me and by the physicist Clifford Paiva.You mentioned, “What evidence do you have that it is not a similar hoax, possible made by the same team?” That can be answered by rephrasing a question you asked a little later, although it requires looking a little deeper into what happened with the Haxan-Films hoax: “Why would anyone go to the trouble of creating a fake photo just to imitate [another fake photo they had made]? That means the Ptp photo (which is older) was not a hoax made by people in (or closely associated with) Haxan Films.I have a friend in California who has been looking at the photo much longer than I have, in greater detail, and he has much more experience in examining and analyzing photos than I have.I pointed out to this person that he had put an image of Ptp onto his web page but that the text referring to it was about the Haxan Films “Freakylinks” TV show hoax photo, which resembles Ptp but which is a completely different photo.It mentions the problem of confusing Ptp with the Haxan Films What a gruesome head!I don’t recall when I first saw the monster photo, perhaps as long ago as 1968, but that long beak and head appendage made me uneasy.
With no idea about copyright issues with Ptp, they just made their own photo, using Ptp as a model. Would you be willing to look into the possibility that you have been influenced by a confirmation bias? I don’t know when I first saw the photo that we now call Ptp. Consider this case like a civil lawsuit rather than like a criminal prosecution.I’ve recently been communicating, by emails, with a skeptic who has written much to persuade people to disbelieve in modern pterosaurs.Here’s part of what I told him in reply to a couple of his questions: We have found significant evidence for the authenticity of Ptp in the past three months.Yet a creepy sensation never completely left me: It was the memory of that head..
Ptp photograph (do not confuse it with the Haxan Films hoax-photo) .
In other words, the Haxan people were in no frame of mind to learn about whether or not Ptp was a hoax or a genuine photo. Jonathan I remember seeing this photograph many year ago, perhaps even in the 1960’s. It could have been around 1968, in the main branch of the public library in Pasadena, California. Critics against the possibility of extant pterosaurs have already sealed that designation by insisting that a species of living pterosaur would not threaten standard ideas in geology or paleontology.