humans in america 26-32 kybp

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by sculptor, Jul 23, 2020.

  1. sculptor Valued Senior Member

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    perhaps what is obvious to me ain't so to others

    where to begin?
    perhaps my grad studies in archaeology/anthropology circa late '70s at u of illinois
    Perhaps evidence of seafaring people circa 130 years kybp
    (Curious that---a hand axe that had been presumed to be no longer used has been dated to 130 kybp on Crete)
    U of I:
    I couldn't quite accept the "clovis first" dogma du-jour
    it went against my training/education

    it's ;ate
    more tomorrow
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    It might not be obvious, but it certainly isn't surprising.

    There's already quite a bit of evidence of humans in the Western Hemisphere prior to the end of the last ice age. The best evidence that I remember reading about was from Chile, with a proposed date of something like 30,000 years before the present.

    See the thread in the link below, in which I mention Cavalli-Sforza's theory that it would have been most likely for humans to cross the Bering land bridge towards the end of the last ice age or towards its beginning, because climactic conditions might have been too extreme to allow a crossing at the middle of the ice age.

    The last ice age only ended about 12,000 B.P., so many accounts of the peopling of the Americas had it happening around then, (Clovis and all that.)

    Except that there have been repeated finds of what may or may not be signs of human habitation that may or may not date from long before that. So Cavalli-Sforza speculated that humans may be crossed over at the beginning of the ice age as well as the end. If true, that would seemingly account for the earlier dates such as your Nature article refers to.

    There are difficulties in identifying some finds as human artifacts in the first place, and dating them is even more difficult. So it's all controversial and speculative at this point. There have been attempts to tie waves of occupation to linguistic and genetic differences, but nothing conclusive so far as far as I know.

    But I do sense that opinion is moving toward greater acceptance of the earlier dates.
    sculptor likes this.
  8. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    let me pick up on the seafaring people---again, Crete, the aforementioned hand axe was assumed to be no longer made after about 175 kybp and yet, one was found in sediments on Crete dated 13o kybp---some people speculate that the early seafarers who made it to Crete were neanderthalensis.
    (could there have been a remnant neanderthal population on crete still making the same tools 35kyrs after everyone else moved on? or..................?)
    That aside:
    We have the peopling of islands and australia 60-70 kybp
    Though, some have claimed a much older date for Japan of 100 kybp.
    (unless these guys could walk on water---they obviously had boats.)
    and, now
    comes the psychology part of the mix
    It seems common for teens to assume that the older generations are primitive, and, well, stupid.
    Some of us grow out of that post-pubescent insanity---some don't.
    Could this disease account for the insistence that the people who peopled the americas did so by walking?

    ok, back to the water. and clovis
    a solutrean point(?) was found by a dredging boat, in the net with the Point(?) was a mastodon skull which was dated to 23kybp. If we assume that the skull and the point(?) are of the same time, then that fits quite nicely into the timeframe of the solutrean culture. (Were the solutreans Basques?)
    skipping merrily ahead,
    We come to the clovis culture, which seems to have magically sprung into existence 13,500 years ago(right after meltwater pulse 1A at the beginning of this interglacial).
    I think not.
    One thing that we look for is evolution including of stone culture. Edgar B. Howard looked in Asia in an attempt to find that evolution and came up empty. We do not see that with Clovis--- then comes: Why not? I suspect that whoever brought the solutrean point(?)/culture over was satisfied with living on the dry continental shelf for 9500 years, evolving their stone culture all the while. I imagine that the climate was more pleasant near the shore.
    So they spread out into the gulf of mexico, only going inland to hunt, including for stone. The solutrean point(?) found of the virginia coast was most likely made of stone from the blue ridge mountains. And, then, came the meltwater floods.
    and A warmer continental climate
    and------the clovis culture magically sprung into existence.

    so far, we have mariners as far back as 130 kybp peopling islands in many many places.
    A likely landing in eastern north america circa 23 kybp.

    seeming obvious yet?

    I'm gonna take a break and walk with the dog down to the river, after which I'll share my thoughts about Tom Dillehay and MonteVerde.

Share This Page