I'm assuming it was clear that those impact points from a theorized 'hammer strike' at 29:30, weren't also potentially recrystallized points like the anomalous discovery at 38:00 with the ancient inscription. He did say they had a microscopic look at them and "there is no doubt to it".
But its curious to me. If I strike a hammer on a rock, I'm certainly going to see a white dot. But I assume its because of the impact induced powdery material contours and how the light is reflected by that material. But if I make a series of impact strikes, all with that powdery material, and then hose the rock down after, what is exposed now is the same rock beneath the surface, and if any powdery debris is washed away, I'd suspect to see the same coloring and the white dot would all but disappear, leaving only the newly slightly concave impression and a play of shadow revealing it, shadow being the opposite effect from a 'white dot'.
So if they feel those white dots are clearly hammer strike points, then it should mean that in the absence of powdery material long washed away, I have to assume that white coloring is from micro fractures in the impact point that allow light in to create that white appearance. But if there are any micro fracture cracks, shouldn't they have filled in over time with microscopic debris negating that play of light that reveals them?
Those dots are weird.