cheemsg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2022
Messages
1,783
Reaction score
4,342
  • #1
  • #2
They could have done a better job describing how and where it was found.

I agree the estimated age range of "15" seems like an error, since the estimated age group is "Cannot Determine."
 
  • #3
Not much to go on unfortunately.

Its possible, depending on which bone was found, the age may be an estimate based on x-ray appearances ( eg the degree of epiphyseal closure in a long bone)

This would only give a rough indication of age however & I think it’s more likely an error as you say.
 
  • #4
They could have done a better job describing how and where it was found.

I agree the estimated age range of "15" seems like an error, since the estimated age group is "Cannot Determine."
I wonder if maybe they entered 15 years to mean how long they thought it had been there? I've seen namus make that mistake before.
 
  • #5
Bumping. Do they have any rule-outs? I wonder if the bone is still available to attempt DNA extraction.
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
56
Guests online
2,016
Total visitors
2,072

Forum statistics

Threads
646,199
Messages
18,855,385
Members
245,928
Latest member
sbrack
Top