Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:01:09.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Never Say Never Again: Some Thoughts on Could Haves and Might Have Beens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

J. M. Adovasio ,
J. Donahue  and
R. Stuckenrath
J. M. Adovasio
Affiliation:
Archaeology Research Program, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275; Departments of Anthropology/Archaeology and Geology, and Mercyhurst Archaeological Institute, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA 16546
J. Donahue
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Planetary Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260
R. Stuckenrath
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh Radiocarbon Laboratory, 365 William Pitt Way, Pittsburgh, PA 15238
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tankersley and Munson (1992) reiterate that the early and, perhaps, some of the later Meadowcroft Rockshelter radiocarbon dates may be contaminated by anthropogenically derived coal or dissolved coal by-products. Their allegations are assessed in light of available data and rejected. Presently, there is no evidence whatsoever for particulate or nonparticulate contamination of any part of the Meadowcroft Rockshelter radiocarbon chronology.

Resumen

Resumen

Tankersley y Munson (1992) sostienen nuevamente que los fechados radiocarbónicos tempranos del abrigo rocoso de Meadowcroft, y tal vez algunos de los fechados tardíos, pueden estar contaminados con carbón antropogénico o derivados de carbón disueltos. En el presente artículo sus argumentos son evaluados y rechazados a la luz de los datos disponibles. Actualmente no hay evidencia alguna de contaminatión mediante partículas o de otro tipo en la cronología radiocarbónica del abrigo rocoso de Meadowcroft.

Type
Comments
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 57 , Issue 2 , April 1992 , pp. 327 - 331
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Adovasio, J. M., Donahue, J., and Stuckenrath, R. 1990 The Meadowcroft Rockshelter Radiocarbon Chronology 1975-1990. American Antiquity 55 : 348–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dincauze, D. F. 1981 The Meadowcroft Papers. Quarterly Review of Archaeology 2 : 3–4.Google Scholar
Haynes, V. 1977 When and From Where Did Man Arrive in Northeastern North America : A Discussion. In Amerinds and Their Paleoenvironments in Northeastern North America, edited by Newman, W. S. and Salwen, B., pp. 165–166. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences 228.Google Scholar
Haynes, V. 1980 Paleoindian Charcoal from Meadowcroft Rockshelter : Is Contamination a Problem? American Antiquity 45 : 582–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes, V. 1991 More on Meadowcroft Rockshelter Radiocarbon Chronology. The Review of Archaeology 12(1) : 8–14.Google Scholar
Kelly, R. L. 1987 A Comment on the Pre-Clovis Deposits at Meadowcroft Rockshelter. Quaternary Research 27 : 332–334.Google Scholar
Mead, J. I. 1980 Is It Really That Old? A Comment About the Meadowcroft “Overview. ” American Antiquity 45 : 579–582.Google Scholar
Tankersley, K. B., and Munson, C. A. 1992 Comments on the Meadowcroft Rockshelter Radiocarbon Chronology and the Recognition of Coal Contaminants. American Antiquity 57 : 321–326.Google Scholar
Tankersley, K. B., Munson, C. A., and Smith, D. 1987 Recognition of Bituminous Coal Contaminants in Radiocarbon Samples. American Antiquity 52 : 318–330.Google Scholar
West, F. H. 1990 Archaeology in the Press : Science Misserved? The Review of Archaeology 11(2) : 25–32.Google Scholar