Really? According to your link it existed in the Pre-Columbian Era, that era extended from 15,000 BC to 600 AD.
Not sure where you get your information, but the pre-Columbian era is up to and beyond 1492 CE. It is disingenuous for you to say that since the site is referred to as Pre-Columbian, that anyone thinks it could date back to 15,000 BCE. The author of the dissertation of which this is an abstract of himself dates it to ca 500-600 CE. So for you to claim that the author of the paper thinks it would be 15,000 BCE is a bald face lie.
quote:
While technically referring to the era before Christopher Columbus' voyages of 1492 to 1504, in practice the term usually includes the history of American indigenous cultures until they were conquered or significantly influenced by Europeans, even if this happened decades or even centuries after Columbus' initial landing.
Source
quote:
, Binghamton University Anthropology professor W. H. Isbell,[1] a radiocarbon date obtained by Vranich[2] from mound fill forming the Pumapunku deposited during the oldest of three construction epochs dates the earliest construction epoch of the Pumapunku at 1510 25 B.P. (A.D. 440; calibrated, A.D. 536—600).
Source
Follow the sources
Foot note 1quote:
Three major building epochs, in addition to small repairs and remodelings, are documented. A radiocarbon date from the earliest construction epoch places it at 1510 25 B.P. (A.D. 440; calibrated, A.D. 536—600).
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
™ Version 4.2