Two research teams defended the 14,500-year dating of Chile's Monte Verde site against a study that challenged it, pointing out methodological flaws in that challenge. Which claim do you find more convincing?

A chilei Monte Verde lelőhely kormeghatározása ismét a tudományos viták kereszttüzébe került — melyik oldalnak hiszel?

• The earlier 14,500-year dating — the evidence is more convincing
• The challenging new study — the original researchers might have been wrong
• Neither side, until there's a clear scientific consensus
• I can't decide, I'm not knowledgeable enough about this