Our Collective Responsibility: The Ethics and Practice of Archaeological Collections Stewardship, ed. S. Terry Childs, Washington, D. C.: Society for American Archaeology, 2004

In this case those conclusions are testable. In 2002 I was contacted by Dr. Stephen Jones of Brigham Young University, a researcher conducting a project on the antiquity of New World horses. He was willing to provide funds for dating the skull using accelerator mass spectrometery (AMS) in order to settle questions regarding the skull’s antiquity. A single sample was removed by MPM staff from the aboral margin of the jaw near the gonion caudale. It was separated into three subsamples, one held as a voucher and the others independently submitted to different radiocarbon labs (Beta Analytic and Stafford Research Laboratories) for AMS dating. The samples were of approximately the same size and yielded results in close agreement. Beta 167209 yielded an uncalibrated date of 110 +- 40 BP; Stafford SR6189 yielded an uncalibrated date of 190 +- 35 BP.

Mormons did not notice this book and the people involved in requesting the testing did not print the results for other Mormons to see. Science worked. A theory was proven wrong, but the results were not published by those who had hoped for a different outcome.

In 2008, a non LDS post graduate student informed FAIR of the error and provided them with the source for the 2004 radiocarbon results. Why didn’t those who requested the radiocarbon dating of the skull publish the results? Why is the video is still on youtube? How many Mormon friends and family might see this video and believe it?