Triceratops Horn Dated to 33,500 Years

Did Humans Walk the Earth with Dinosaurs? Triceratops Horn Dated to 33,500 Years

(Read the article on one page)

A Triceratops brow horn discovered in Dawson County, Montana, has been controversially dated to around 33,500 years, challenging the view that dinosaurs died out around 65 million years ago.  The finding radically suggests that early humans may have once walked the earth with the fearsome reptiles thousands of years ago.

The Triceratops brow horn was excavated in May 2012 and stored at the Glendive Dinosaur and Fossil Museum. The Museum, which has since 2005 been in cooperation with the Paleochronology Group, a team of consultants in geology, paleontology, chemistry, engineering, and education, sent a sample of the outer portion of the Triceratops brow horn to Head of the Paleochronology Group Hugh Miller, at his request, in order to carry out Carbon-14 dating. Mr Miller sent the sample to the University of Georgia, Center for Applied Isotope Studies, for this purpose. The sample was divided at the lab into two fractions with the “bulk” or collagen break down products yielding an age of 33,570 ± 120 years and the carbonate fraction of bone bioapatite yielding an age of 41,010 ± 220 years [UGAMS-11752 & 11752a]. Mr Miller told Ancient Origins that it is always desirable to carbon-14 date several fractions to minimize the possibility of errors which Miller requested and that essential concordance was achieved in the 1000's of years as with all bone fractions of ten other dinosaurs.

Triceratops, a name meaning “three-horned face”, is a genus of herbivorous ceratopsid dinosaur that is said to have first appeared during the late Maastrichtian stage of the late Cretaceous period, about 68 million years ago in what is now North America, and became extinct in the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago. However, scientists from the Paleochronology Group, who perform research relating to “anomalies of science”, maintain that dinosaurs did not die out millions of years ago and that there is substantial evidence that they were still alive as recently as 23,000 years ago.

Classical reconstruction of a Triceratops

Classical reconstruction of a Triceratops ( Wikimedia Commons )

Until recently, Carbon-14 dating was never used to test dinosaur bones, as the analysis is only reliable up to 55,000 years. Scientists never considered it worthwhile to run the test since it is generally believed that dinosaurs have been extinct for 65 million years, based on radiometric dating of the volcanic layers above or below fossils, a method which the Paleochronology Group states has “serious problems and gross assumptions must be made”.

"It became clear years ago that paleontologists were not just neglecting to test dinosaur bones for C-14 content but were refusing to. Normally a good scientist will be curious about the ages of important fossil bones,” Mr Miller told Ancient Origins in an email.  

YouTube video explaining results of carbon testing on dinosaur bones

The results of the Triceratops Horn analysis are not unique. According to Mr Miller, numerous C-14 tests have now been carried out on dinosaur bones, and surprisingly, they all returned results dating back in the thousands rather than millions of years.

“I organized the Paleochronology group in 2003 to fill a void with regards fossil wood and dinosaur bones as I was curious as to their age by  C-14 dating.  We thus have used C-14 dating to solve the mystery why soft tissue and dinosaur depictions exist world-wide. Our model predicted dinosaur bones would have significant C-14 and indeed they did in the range of 22,000 to 39,000 years BP,” Mr Miller added.

Results of C-14 tests on dinosaur bones

Results of C-14 tests on dinosaur bones provided by the Paleochronology Group .

Numerous independent researchers have long argued that there is evidence man and dinosaur once walked the Earth together, such as hundreds of ancient artworks and artifacts that appear to depict dinosaurs, long before modern science had pieced together dinosaur fossils and conducted analyses to produce detailed reconstructions of their appearance.

Top left: Relief carving at Angkor Wat, Cambodia (1186 AD). Top Right: Textile from Nazca, Peru (700 AD). Bottom: Tapestry in the Chateau de Blois (1500 AD)

Top left: Relief carving at Angkor Wat, Cambodia (1186 AD). Top Right: Textile from Nazca, Peru (700 AD). Bottom: Tapestry in the Chateau de Blois (1500 AD)

However, even more intriguing is the discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur fossils. In the March 2005 issue of Science , paleontologist Mary Schweitzer and her team announced the discovery of soft tissue inside a 68-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus rex leg bone from the Hell Creek Formation in Montana, a controversial finding considering scientists had thought soft tissue proteins degrade in less than 1 million years in the best of conditions. After recovery, the tissue was rehydrated by the science team and testing revealed evidence of intact structures such as blood vessels, bone matrix, and connective tissue. 


Same old story with any thing that goes against current mainstream beliefs. Keeping the masses ignorant of our true history.

Hold on a moment - the date may be perfectly valid but lots of extinct animals in the Paleolithic had enormous horns and this horn could easily belong to a more modern extinct animal such as an Auroch (Bos Primigenious) or antique Woolly Rhinoceros (Decerotini) what evidence (like the skull) confirms this is a tricerotops ? Anyone who's done A level Archaeology knows this. European Cave paintings show these animals alive 20,000 years ago, why didn't anyone think of this? D'oh!

Your completely right! The first remains of ceratopsian dinosaurs ( triceratops and it's kin) were of their horns, which looked almost exactly like that of buffalo. That's why the first remains attributed to triceratops were called "Bison alticornis".

I have worked on bison horns and skulls and the second I saw that picture, I knew it was a Pleistocene bison horn. Anyone educated in paleontology knows that is not a triceratops horn - not even close. And, there is no evidence of dinosaurs above the KT boundary, except for chickens. :)

Tsurugi's picture

There was no evidence of advanced civilization before 6,000 BC ether. Until one day there was, i.e., Gobekli Tepe, and now, Gunung Padang. Certainly now that the door has been opened, more and more will be found, until it is plentiful.

It was not lack of evidence that kept such ancient civilizations from becoming known. It was theoretical preconceptions, and the resulting lack of anyone actually looking for the evidence that was, and is, there.

Meanwhile, this horn was found in the same strata containing vast numbers of other dinosaur remains. If it is a bison horn, it still poses some rather serious questions, therefore. Like, what is it doing among all those dinos?
Meanwhile, actual contiguous triceratops bones have since been freed from the rock, so it doesn't seem to be much in doubt that it is, in fact, a triceratops horn and not that of a bison, educations in paleontology notwithstanding. Especially as they seem to come complete with large doses of confirmation bias and a rather debilitating set of blinders.

What people are missing here is:
If the Dino bones are young, then the geological columns used for dating eras are incorrect. If the data used to date all of the fossils are incorrect, then the EvoMod is incorrect. Now it's up to science to produce an EvoMod that does not contain millions of years, but rather tens of thousands.

'If it is a bison horn, it still poses some rather serious questions, therefore. Like, what is it doing among all those dinos?'

Are you being serious? If it's a bison horn, then it wouldn't have been among 'all those dinosaurs' since this page itself tells you, the horn is only a few thousand years old, the dinosaur bones are millions of years old.

huh? I think you are missing something. If the other poster is correct, he brings up a very valid question. assuming for a moment that that "bison" horn was found at the same depth and place as the dino bones.......either that bison is about 50-60 million years old and should have died off like the dinos, or....the triceratops bones are in fact much much younger. there is no other possibility, you will not ever see bones and fossils 50 million years apart in age, together. It just doesn't happen that way.

Thanks for the clarification. Too many people are gullible.

Yes even in africa there are drawings that are more recent. Very soon the emela ntouka of congo shall have some plausible evidence.

A silly, rude reply. This horn is just one of MANY pieces of evidence pointing in the same direction, so there is no need for your put-down. I am sure that they have identified it properly. Why didn't you think of that? Doh!

They date the bones based on the rock strata in which their found. This data is liable to throw a few other scientific disciplines for a loop as well. Geology for example. Dino bones being dated through the age of rock strata. If fossils are dated to 20,000 years then the rock has to be the same age, their goes that theory and cosmology follows closely behind with biology running to catch up. Exciting times

Scotty - yes, wow, this is really so significant, good comment! Could this mean that the 'Cretaceous' period was actually ... just part of the 'Stone Age' .. ??

rbflooringinstall's picture

I agree. This is pretty much on par with the whole Red Headed Giant theory they have hidden from us for decades.

Peace and Love,


Barbara, I totally agree with you (my other comment was a reply to the others). Scientific discourse in this and other important areas is losing credibility fast. There is far too much shallow thinking and cowardice from people who prefer to keep their head in the sand, just to keep in line with established doctrine.

Barbara, I totally agree with you (my other comment was a reply to the others). Scientific discourse in this and other important areas is losing credibility fast. There is far too much shallow thinking and cowardice from people who prefer to keep their head in the sand, just to keep in line with established doctrine.

That is a Bison horn, not a dinosaur bone. Im a paleontologist, sorry a REAL paleontologist. Stop making up stories. You cant use Carbon 14 dating on dinosaur bone anyways, you have to use Uranium 238. The bible is not a text book for geology. its a collection of fairy tales about mythological people.

One doesn't have very far back to look at all to find myth and legend. It's found every day in history, sociology, Geology, and other science text books still in print. Point is, the more things change, the more they stay insane. Here is something Sane....

Myths and legends he says.....

At any rate,

Good Journies

Triceratops have long strait unmistakable horns. Do you think they actually found a single horn and decided to say it was a triceratops? They found a triceratops and tested the horn. Also bison horns are nothing close to a triceratops. All you people agreeing with this just showed you'll jump on a band wagon that makes absolutely ridiculups claimsbecause someone claims to be someone the obviously aren't. Take the evolution fight out if it , grab a firm hold of the science and let that speak for itself. Look up professors. What of the Trecx findings? And paleontolog ist know little about isotope dating. Physicist are the ones that actually date things. So please keep an open mind and do not cause Strife.

Unless that's a tape measure for fishermen being held by a hairy-armed child, the horn in the picture is about 3 feet long (and less curved than any bison horn I've seen). That'd be one big funny looking bison. I'd stick with the triceratops theory and carbon date more fossils to find out what's really going on (as many have already said, let the science do the talking). It wouldn't be the first time we've discovered we were looking at something in the wrong way. The only response that is senseless is to blindly assume the old dogma is law and ignore something truly amazing (btw I'm a scientist not a creationist).

It's funny. I couldn't find a Paleontologist named Chris Shelton. But I did find a guy with a "critical thinker" skeptics blog named Chris Shelton. Might you actually be him!!?!??

I can't argue with your statement that you are a Paleontologist, and if you are, you definitely know tons more than me in this specific field of study. But if you really are a Paleontologist, you seem to be quite bias in your comments about the Bible. I studied Theology and the Bible and there's much more to the book than secondhand statements that you seem to be accepting and repeating at will. I'd like to know if you did the homework with the biblical texts as well as the historical and archaeological aspects often times found to be very accurate. You, as a scientist, are also ignoring or are just uneducated in all the many things going on around the globe that go beyond the worldview of Evolution. But those who either through sincerity or honest skepticism dive a little deeper into various biblical texts will find many surprises waiting for them. Blessings

You are correct, there's a new book with covers dinosaurs living with man, it also explains why were are not being told about this.
The book is called 'Black Ops, Aliens, Spirits, Bigfoot and our untold History'

I think it's also on Amazon and Kindle, well worth reading.

I told you so!
It doesnt take much brainpower to figure out that dinosaurs did not all die out 65 million yrs ago. And that the Dragon myths arent just myths but based on real events, real creatures >>> DINOSAURS!
It is absolutely disgustingly sad that mainstream scientists and journals are ignoring this and blocking attempts for this to go mainstream!
I agree with the comment above that there may be groups who dont want humanity to know the truth about our past.
We have news for them, their fun is over. They are fighting a losing battle.
Well done to these pioneering and REAL scientists. Religion doesnt have a place here. Dont bring creation BS into this. Evolution is true. Fact. At least in the sense of that animals have lived on this planet for millions of millions of years. That is fact at the very least.
Humans were created about 300 000 years ago if you believe the ancient texts and dating of some ancient sites... And not created by God. But genetically engineered.
Just as much prove for this as there is for 30 000 yr old dinosaurs. Do the research, its there, but hidden from public knowledge! Deliberately??

Thanks April for your team's great work. Maybe you should make use of the services of a social media marketing wizard...

Sorry dude, etymology of 'Dragon' kills your hypothesis. 'Dragon' is the plural of 'Draw' which is 'drag'. Your draggings is your drawing of a beast.

Tsurugi's picture

You should explain that to the Chinese. I'd love to watch you attempt to connect an english etymological dismissal of their very ancient, culture-wide stories of flying serpents, i.e., dragons.
After that, you can do it with all the other ancient "sky serpent" stories from cultures all over the world. Should be amusing to see you try and "draw" that conclusion multiple times...a truly beastly dragging to attempt, I'd imagine.

Actually dude, but the etymology of "Dragon" is from the Greek "Draconis" meaning "serpent".

I agree with almost all you say. You've done your research and are not afraid to go with the evidence.

I believe in evolution to an extent, I think the thought that humans evolved from apes is ridiculous. Also how did species today evolve from those that are prehisttoric, of they were "wiped out" ? How is it sharks, crocodiles, birds, snakes, apes, all which were prehistocirc, all still can be found today ? If humans evolved from apes then why do we still have apes ? It just make so sense and is questionable. As I said I believe in evolution to a degree, but much these ideas are contradictory ! The things is much of science is simply based on the ideas, or hypothesises of whom ever can provide the most substantial evidence to back their claims, it doesn't make it fact, just that this is the best explanation thus far.

Incredibly ironic.  On the one hand we have creationists taking a scientific approach to religion, and on the other we have the scientific zealots taking a religious approach to science.  At least there's a bit of humor in all the madness.

i second here.

johnblack's picture

I am also with you Rizzman. Excellent comment!

This is what blows my mind about so-called science. Scientists assume so much and make outrageous statements as if they were true and are then afforded the privilege of being off 65 million plus years and still maintain their credibility in the secular, God denying world. How can they be so wrong over and over again and the masses took so much faith in their findings? There are countless examples throughout every field of science. But if you mention even the possibility of God or a spiritual world which many people throughout history have testified to, you're considered an idiot by the arrogant intellects and scientists. The truth is, we know very little about our universe and it's origins.

God being a work of fiction has nothing to do with the topic at hand. The Torah and Bible fail on countless levels. Not the least of which is common sense.

Tsurugi's picture

This comment makes no sense at all. The Torah and the Bible are collections of ancient texts, much like any other collection of ancient texts. All ancient texts contain spiritual beliefs and practices and discussions of deities, and are priceless fonts of knowledge about humans and human history. There is no failure there, on any level.

In fact, the only failure I see is your seeming inability to disconnect the concept of a "god" or creator-type being from the disparate writings of ancient peoples. It's like looking at the writings of ancient Greek philosophers on the nature of the universe, seeing that they got some things wrong, and concluding that therefore the whole idea of "universe" is crap. That type of thinking makes no logical sense.

There are only two possibilities: the universe happened by accident, or it didn't. The latter possibility implies the existence of some kind of supreme creative intelligent awareness, a "God" of some sort.
Please explain how that is any more a "fiction" than the idea that "there was nothing, and then suddenly there was everything, all at once, for no reason at all."

You might think that the concept of "God" makes no sense. All I am pointing out is that the concept of "no God" makes no sense either, and any attempt to make it make sense is, by definition, a work of pure fiction.

How does it not make sense? If there is a god, who created him? Your theory, sorry, I mean unsubstantiated statement, that god created everything holds exactly the same problem. You can believe something you have never seen has always existed but cannot believe energy, and therefore matter, has always existed. One we have proof is here, one we do not.

Tsurugi's picture

Did you actually read what I wrote? I did not claim god created everything, I said that there are two possibilities: either the universe is an accident, or it was created.
Both are incredibly improbable, to the point where any favoring of one possibility over the other pretty much comes down to personal preference.

In your reply you don't respond to anything I actually said. I didn't propose a "theory" or "unsubstantiated statement" that god created everything. I didn't profess a belief in any god, eternal or otherwise.

Nice job of smashing those "arguments", but they are only strawmen. If you want to actually respond to stuff I actually said, I'll be over here, having a margarita.

I've been reading the articles and comments on this site for a while know and I've noticed that you can't help butting in just for the sake of arguing. No matter what the topic is you seem to be able to find something to comment on and argue about.i reckon you're a know-it-all and a smart-arse. Enjoy your drink

Tsurugi's picture

....was it something I said?

Actually, i can nothing but agree with what you said. Our whole existence is beyond comprehending, no one, i re-peat, no one can say "This is what happened". If you want the truth, you have to be open to the possibility that there is indeed a "God" of some sort or form.

Stating that "I am an atheist and therefor i am right" will get you nowhere.
now, i must admit that i consider myself being an atheist, but just beacuse i have not been proven wrong. My mind is still open.

Tsurugi's picture

Thank you. That is what I've been trying to say, only you said it much more succinctly.

That is a spot on anaysis of the situation!  We have one group of scientists (group A,)   formulating a theory based research and field work, employing the scientific method to test that theory out by experimentation in the lab, and requesting that others do independant experimentation, to prove or disprove their findings.  Yet, they are hindered or blocked from publishing, and even get fired and rediculed for doing their jobs.  While on the other hand, we have a second group (B) of scientists, from many different fields of expertise, who refuse to do any experiments to test their theories.  They refuse any efforts to be engaged in scientific discovery, even when tempted by the carrot of discovering somthing NEW about an existing topic.  The scientists of group B (which call group A fraudulent and ill-educated) are desperately clinging to what is, esencially, a religious dogma.  The group B continues to refuse to conduct ANY scientific experiments to validate their assumptions, choosing instead to jump directly to the last step: declaring their beliefs to be facts (without any proof to back up the claim.)  Very curious indeed.  Why NOT do the tests, group B?  Is it because you’re afraid that you won't like the answer?  Are you afraid of being proven wrong?  Whatever happened to the joy of new discovery? Isn't that what science is supposed to be about, discovering new things and understanding them?  Scientists used to get prizes and congrats for finding new evidence that changes our perspective and expands our understanding of our world.  Now, they get fired.  I’m with group A; we should actually use the scientific method to uncover the truth, no matter what it is.  We can't just say, ‘I’m right because I’m right!” and bury our heads in the sand. TEST EVERYTHING, using every method at hand, even if it seems silly.  If you are shocked by the results… GOOD!  That means you’ve learned something new.

God is the source of all wisdom.

Roberto Peron's picture

At some point we are going to have to admit that much of our history as we have been told is WRONG!  And we are going to have to admit that our dating is in error.  And at some point we are going to have to follow the evidence wherever it leads and no matter whose pet theory, tenure, or funding it disrupts.  That is, IF we wish to pursue REAL science.  I remember when the soft tissue was found back in 2012 and I was astounded to say the least.  I did not think it possible but it was there and very real.  Yet, it should not have been there at all.  What this article talks about does NOT prove evolution is all wrong, although I tend to think some of the dates are a bit too fantastic, just as it doesn't prove SOME dinosaurs may have went extinct 66 mya.  Indeed, some may have continued to exist as late as 23,000 years ago.  There have been several "extinction events" as near as we can tell but NONE of them wiped out everything otherwise you, me, and alll these species we share this planet with today wouldn't be here today.  I really do not think one mass extinction event wiped out every dinosaur!  In fact, there might even be some still around today! Rather, than write a novel here you can read my further comments on this subject at:

Damn, where can I get that stuff that's been passed around? I want to smoke sum too =)

is this a joke?

No it's not a joke. Unless you want it to be a joke in your own mind?

if it isn't a joke then what is it

Not a joke. There was no need for any of us to have got so wedded to the idea that dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago ... I believe that was a premature thesis based on dating methods that have been known to be unreliable for quite some time now (incorrrect assumption of predictable constant rates of decay).

Way to use the entirely wrong dating method for the purpose. C-14 dating is inappropriate for dinosaur bones. But hey, whatever feeds the "we walked with dinosaurs narrative."

And you sound so sure about your comment?
Did you take 5 seconds to think that maybe if carbon dating is used on something that's millions of years old, that the result will always be a certain maximum number. The maximum that carbon dating can be used for. Therefore, using carbon dating on dino bones should theoretically ALWAYS give this same maximum number as the result. No exceptions.
Also, GOOD science is when you try things out and do tests that dont make sense to you but you do them anyway. Religious science is when you dont do a test just because of some belief or preconception you have. If it doesnt fit within your realm of possibilities, then you avoid it like the plague. MOST scientists are like this, and it's a real shame.
Cognitive dissonance maybe?
The fact of the matter is, there is no strong argument to suggest it impossible for dinos to have existed within the last 100 000 years. Crocodiles exist today. Sharks exist today. They also existed 65 million yrs ago... What's so special about them that they survived the extinction event?
And thats my weakest argument I used there. Do some research and you'll find evidence that will test your guts to think outside of established mainstream shit.


Register to become part of our active community, get updates, receive a monthly newsletter, and enjoy the benefits and rewards of our member point system OR just post your comment below as a Guest.

Ancient Technology

All images courtesy of Dr Rita Louise
The vajra is the most important ritual implement of Vajrayana Buddhism. In Sanskrit, the word vajra is defined as something hard or mighty, as in a diamond. It symbolizes an impenetrable, immovable and indestructible state of knowledge and enlightenment.

Our Mission

At Ancient Origins, we believe that one of the most important fields of knowledge we can pursue as human beings is our beginnings. And while some people may seem content with the story as it stands, our view is that there exists countless mysteries, scientific anomalies and surprising artifacts that have yet to be discovered and explained.

The goal of Ancient Origins is to highlight recent archaeological discoveries, peer-reviewed academic research and evidence, as well as offering alternative viewpoints and explanations of science, archaeology, mythology, religion and history around the globe.

We’re the only Pop Archaeology site combining scientific research with out-of-the-box perspectives.

By bringing together top experts and authors, this archaeology website explores lost civilizations, examines sacred writings, tours ancient places, investigates ancient discoveries and questions mysterious happenings. Our open community is dedicated to digging into the origins of our species on planet earth, and question wherever the discoveries might take us. We seek to retell the story of our beginnings. 

Ancient Image Galleries

View from the Castle Gate (Burgtor). (Public Domain)
Door surrounded by roots of Tetrameles nudiflora in the Khmer temple of Ta Phrom, Angkor temple complex, located today in Cambodia. (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Cable car in the Xihai (West Sea) Grand Canyon (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Next article