Oh pull your head in, you drop kick.
Now this evo is challenging a publication in National Geographic.
First you loosers quack about creos not using evidence and when they do you come up with hubris to save face on forum. Clown!
Here is another source that obviously doesn't think it is a fake.
Yes, I am. It would not be the first time that Nat. Geo. was horribly wrong. In fact any claim that is not supported in retesting is always questionable. Why couldn't you find some support for that date outside of your one source?