Upon further investigation no
evidence of the abnormally small
buildings could be found and the
mummy, far from being an adult,
turned out to be little more than a
baby. Anthropological studies also
dated the mummy to just 400 years
ago, putting to rest the concept of a
5,000-year-old dwarven city.
In the end the incident turned out
to be little more than a prime
example of media sensationalism
based on false information, rumor
somehow, i'm failing to see the story here, or am i missing something...?
In the beginning there were only probabilities. The universe could only come into existence if someone observed it. It does not matter that the observers turned up several billion years later. The universe exists because we are aware of it.
It dates from October 2005 and already contains skeptical comments. The only two people named in the article are archaeologists and both doubt the dwarf claims. Yes, it mentions the idea the dwarf must be 16-17 years old, but the assertion has no name attached to it.