<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Twin Ritual.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/</link>
	<description>The Neat Side of the Web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 21:20:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/comment-page-1/#comment-53230</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2006 16:16:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/#comment-53230</guid>
		<description>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/carbon_dating.asp</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/carbon_dating.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/carbon_dating.asp</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/comment-page-1/#comment-52792</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2006 23:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/#comment-52792</guid>
		<description>Next year, it will be 27,001 years old!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Next year, it will be 27,001 years old!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jenny</title>
		<link>http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/comment-page-1/#comment-52777</link>
		<dc:creator>Jenny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/#comment-52777</guid>
		<description>Plus, it&#039;s not like these methods are very new.  Radiocarbon dating was discovered in 1949, and stratigraphy has been around... forever?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Plus, it&#8217;s not like these methods are very new.  Radiocarbon dating was discovered in 1949, and stratigraphy has been around&#8230; forever?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sam</title>
		<link>http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/comment-page-1/#comment-52768</link>
		<dc:creator>sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2006 21:42:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/#comment-52768</guid>
		<description>Actually, Tim, they do have several accurate methods.  There are relative dating methonds (Stratigraphy, flourine dating, biostratigraphy, poleomagnetic reversals) and chronometric dating methods (carbon-14 dating, potassium-argon dating, argon-argon dating, etc.)  I don&#039;t know where you got the idea that they just pick numbers out of thin air, but maybe you should do a little research.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, Tim, they do have several accurate methods.  There are relative dating methonds (Stratigraphy, flourine dating, biostratigraphy, poleomagnetic reversals) and chronometric dating methods (carbon-14 dating, potassium-argon dating, argon-argon dating, etc.)  I don&#8217;t know where you got the idea that they just pick numbers out of thin air, but maybe you should do a little research.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/comment-page-1/#comment-52690</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:25:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.neatorama.com/2006/11/17/twin-ritual/#comment-52690</guid>
		<description>The 27,000 years is a guess and could be a little as 100 years old. Anthropologists have no foolproof way of knowing the date of items found. Accurate methods of testing has yet to be found.

I wish they would just say &quot;We Think it is xxx old&quot; instead of just picking a number out of thin air.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 27,000 years is a guess and could be a little as 100 years old. Anthropologists have no foolproof way of knowing the date of items found. Accurate methods of testing has yet to be found.</p>
<p>I wish they would just say &#8220;We Think it is xxx old&#8221; instead of just picking a number out of thin air.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Page Cached by VaroCMS @ Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:02:45 +0000 --><!-- page generated in 0.0767 seconds -->
