Hi Paul,

I wouldn't be surprised if it it, however to say there is 'little doubt' the carvings are 15,000 years old and compare them with Lascaux, before any sort of archaeometry has been done seems rash to me.

Nat Geo seems to have a habit of getting people to claim all sorts of things before the peer reviewed articles have been published.

The Lascaux paintings have been minutely examined and dated by C14 from the paint. These rock carvings are altogether more difficult to date - and it will be done by some sort of patina analysis and not a radioactive decay method (I have no idea what the Uranium method is).

Dave L



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/2007 05:22AM by Dave L.