coprolites

There are as many (or more) studies indicating that human coprolites contained more plant than animal matter.

And even then you could only find the appropriate types of coprolites in middle-Pleistocene layers from 2 Mya or later.

However, they squeeze a lot of money from the coprolites, and that’s enough to buy regulatory capture, I guess.

Bullshit petrifies into coprolites, which would then only be found in sedimentary layers.

I like to say that the danger of software archaeology is the inevitable discovery of coprolites...

I'm wondering how you'd be able to prove or disprove this though, maybe coprolites?

You can find this in coprolites preserved in habitable caves.

Not sure if you saw that part, but article mentions 300,000 years of coprolites found in the caves which indicates an extensive presence of these animals.

There are branches of archeology and paleontology studying ancient feces (look up coprolites and paleofeces,) and deriving a lot of information about ancient societies and animals.

In addition to this type of evidence perhaps they should focus on locating DNA evidence from coprolites or similar traces of the humans who left those tracks.

We have copious evidence of prehistoric cannibalism in the form of human body proteins in preserved coprolites, and human bones with butchering marks and human teeth marks.

Same with the viking coprolites found in Jorvik/York?

Something I didn't know before writing this week's issue: Ancient turd fossils are called "coprolites"

That's probably why it eclipsed the details and left you with the "bigger picture" as you so unconsciously put it;) for instance, do you remember what Coprolites are?