--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Wow, good to see your copy and paste skills are still intact. Very well done.

====
Refer to my below response in which summarizes that:
1. Neandert(h)als were fully human
2. Dating techiques are based on statistical assumptions of random and spontaneous radioactive decay, thus discrepancies are the rule, not the exception. (The KEY words being "random' and "spontaneous.")
3. If you wish (since I suspect that you created the original post), name a specific specie and I'll go over the one with you. Otherwise, "evidence of man from the Stone age nearly 12,000 years ago" is too vague to address.
====

1. Your posts/links said nothing about a Neanderthal being "fully human":
a. "probably not significantly different from that of modern humans"
b. "slightly enlarged version of a human hyoid"
c. "closely resembles that of humans today"
d. "roughly the same size"
None of these say that Neanderthals = Homo Sapiens. They each claim slight or subtle differences, but NOT equality. Are you claiming there IS no difference?
Also, what did the original post have to ask about Neanderthals? I don't get it.

2. Your article is based on a hoax by Reiner Protcsch, and doesn't threaten carbon dating methods at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiner_Protsch_von_Zieten

3. I had nothing to do with the original post, honest engine. If the original question was too vague to address, why address it? Why not clarify, THEN answer the question instead of throwing around nonsense about carbon dating and Neanderthals?