Archeology

[R. Richard]

As an offshoot, most people forget the land bridge worked both ways. Horses appeared in the Americas first, and migrated to Asia, and died off here.

The current theory is that early hunters killed off the new world horses, vice the horses dying off.

 

[Misty_Morning]

Misty's called me that since she's been here, I think. I like it, too.

Whoops! I did say that I wouldn't call you that on the boards. Sorry.

 

[Weird Harold]

but why is matrilineal descent more 'trustworthy'(?) than patrilineal? xy versus xx. I don't understand.

I suspect it's because mitochondrial DNA can be obtained from both sexes -- both living donors and archeological sources.

It is possible to track the "Y" chromosome DNA and for the History Channel's recent program on Ghengis Khan, it has been done (his direct descendants number in the millions, FWIW.)

One other point in favor of using mDNA for tracking prehistoric migrations is that tracking patrilineal DNA through the Y chromosome is skewed by temporary conquests -- a lot of the aforementioned progeny of Ghengi Khan are in Eastern Europe where the Mogols "scattered their seed" and left several times. The ebb and flow of conquest and border conflicts can be traced through the yDNA, but it doesn't show much about migration patterns in the same area -- i.e. where the families and cultures settled and stayed or moved.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

The current theory is that early hunters killed off the new world horses, vice the horses dying off.

That's true. They were served at the very first McDonalds between two slices of bread with ketchup and mayo

 

[R. Richard]

That's true. They were served at the very first McDonalds between two slices of bread with ketchup and mayo

Actually, not true. It was horseradish [where do you think the name came from?] instead of ketchup and mayo.

 

[Weird Harold]

This will bore some of the Literotica people, but the growing acceptance that the Clovis people were NOT the first Americans is a major step in understanding our heritage. Comments?

For those who are interested in the question of the "First Americans," check out http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/stoneage/

I just caught a repeat of this NOVA episode and I think it gives a pretty good explanation of the various questions and concepts. The companion webpage link above has links to some other good ingformation, as well as to the program itself viewable online.

 

[R. Richard]

For those who are interested in the question of the "First Americans," check out http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/stoneage/

I just caught a repeat of this NOVA episode and I think it gives a pretty good explanation of the various questions and concepts. The companion webpage link above has links to some other good ingformation, as well as to the program itself viewable online.

An interesting site, WH! The careful observer will not the several of the old, possibly pre-Clovis sites were near the West coast. This last argues for colonization via boat, rather than land bridge.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

An interesting site, WH! The careful observer will not the several of the old, possibly pre-Clovis sites were near the West coast. This last argues for colonization via boat, rather than land bridge.

It likely also indicates colonization due to easily acessable food source. Lots of fish, shell fish and, 40,000 years ago, Mastadons and an antelope-like grazer. In addition, there was close proximity to resources (flint and obsidian), fuel and easily produced or found shelter. That's pretty much all the tribe would need to set up a stable, non-moving culture.

Interesting they found a site in McMinnville. That's 80 miles east of the coast and 20 miles west of the closest river. It's close to the center of the Willamette valley in the flat lands. Back at that time it would have been a grassy veld, just right for grazing herds. Only about 10 miles west is the Coast Range mountians where they would find raw materials for tools and shallow forests with fuel and other game even closer.

Fort Rock Cave is a little harder to think about. That's on the east slope of the Willowa Mountains near the desert. There isn't much in the way of water there now, but 15,000 years ago, Willowa Lake would have been much larger and proveded. Also, fish and wandering herds, I guess. But it's 300 miles from the coast and 40 or 50 miles from any sizable river. Odd place.

The Washington site makes sense. That's right near Puget Sound. There would have been whaling, fishing and roaming herds there.

 

[Weird Harold]

An interesting site, WH! The careful observer will not the several of the old, possibly pre-Clovis sites were near the West coast. This last argues for colonization via boat, rather than land bridge.

What strikes me as the most interesting point is that the three oldest pre-clovis sites (at least those I know of) are about as far from the "ice bridge" as it's possible to get -- Pennsylvania, Florida, and Monte Verde, Chile -- and (relatively) near the coast.

I wonder what, if anything, is known about ice-age and pre-ice-age weather patterns and ocean currents -- modern weather and current patterns make sailing primitive boats from Europe to the carribean and polynesia to chile fairly easy.

The modern Japanese Current from southeast Asia through the gulf of Alaska and down the pacific coast tends to deposit things like Japanese fishing floats along the Oregon and northern California coast; it makes sailing from Asia to Oregon and California dead easy.

If the ice-age currents and weather patterns are similar to modern ones, almost anything that floats would suffice to bring small groups to the Americas by simple misadventure.

 

[Misty_Morning]

What strikes me as the most interesting point is that the three oldest pre-clovis sites (at least those I know of) are about as far from the "ice bridge" as it's possible to get -- Pennsylvania, Florida, and Monte Verde, Chile -- and (relatively) near the coast.

I wonder what, if anything, is known about ice-age and pre-ice-age weather patterns and ocean currents -- modern weather and current patterns make sailing primitive boats from Europe to the carribean and polynesia to chile fairly easy.

The modern Japanese Current from southeast Asia through the gulf of Alaska and down the pacific coast tends to deposit things like Japanese fishing floats along the Oregon and northern California coast; it makes sailing from Asia to Oregon and California dead easy.

If the ice-age currents and weather patterns are similar to modern ones, almost anything that floats would suffice to bring small groups to the Americas by simple misadventure.

Yeah, the polynesian theory has been around for awhile from what I can recall.

I think that we are so engrossed with our own technological skills that we have become arrogant to the point of stupidity. Personally I wouldn't doubt for a second that early "europeans" had access to north and/or south america.

I'm gonna look for references to a documentary I saw seveal years ago on the chemical analysis of red ocre used in cave and rock paintings throughout the coasts of North America and Europe. But the gist of it was that much of the red ocre was mined from one area in what is now France. It kinda fits with some of the other info coming to light.

And if we want to look at a less distant history, let's look at all the egyptian mummies which have been found to have cocaine and nicitine in their bodies. These compounds were only found in the western hemisphere.

Here's a few sites about that. Here and here

 

[usemeplease28]

This will bore some of the Literotica people, but the growing acceptance that the Clovis people were NOT the first Americans is a major step in understanding our heritage. Comments?

Experts doubt Clovis people were first in Americas

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Clovis people, known for their distinctive spear points, likely were not the first humans in the Americas, according to research placing their presence as more recent than previously believed.

Using advanced radiocarbon dating techniques, researchers writing in the journal Science on Thursday said the Clovis people, hunters of large Ice Age animals like mammoths and mastodons, dated from about 13,100 to 12,900 years ago.

That would make the Clovis culture, known from artifacts discovered at various sites including the town of Clovis, New Mexico, both younger and shorter-lived than previously thought. Previous estimates had dated the culture to about 13,600 years ago.

These people long had been seen as the first humans in the New World, but the new dates suggest their culture thrived at about the same time or after others also in the Americas.

Michael Waters, director of Texas A&M University's Center for the Study of the First Americans, called the research the final nail in the coffin of the so-called "Clovis first" theory of human origins in the New World.

Waters said he thinks the first people probably arrived in the Americas between 15,000 and 25,000 years ago.

"We've got to stop thinking about the peopling of the Americas as a singular event," Waters said in an interview.

"And we have to start now thinking about the peopling of the Americas as a process, with people coming over here, probably arriving at different times, maybe taking different routes and coming from different places in northeast Asia."

Waters and co-author Thomas Stafford, a radiocarbon dating expert, tested samples from various Clovis archeological sites to try to get a more accurate accounting of their age. Technological advances enabled them to more precisely pinpoint dates for some Clovis sites excavated in North America.

The theory has been that the Clovis people first migrated out of northeast Asia across the Bering land bridge from Siberia into Alaska and traveled through a ice-free corridor into North America, populating that continent while their descendants journeyed into South America.

Asked who were the first people in the Americas if not the Clovis, Waters answered, "That's a good question."

"I think that's what we've got to work toward -- a new model for the peopling of the Americas, and I think we need to create a coherent model that's based on genetic data, geological evidence as well as archeological data."

Yeah.. I recently saw something about this on NOVA.
There are many pre-clovis findings that were hidden as to not make findings seem false. They noted extensive DNA testing that suggests there were other methods of travel.. I dont believe the boat theory.. you never know tho.. I do believe that there were people traveling the coastline and not always waiting for the ice to connect Alaska with America. It also shows traces of humans well over 20k years ago who didn't only use tools as weapons.. but also as a form of cutting grass to possibly build huts.

I really don't see the point of arguing who was in the Americas first.. I'm interested in the first form of Human.

From a mostly visual reference... American Indians resemble a mix of Asian and Spanish to be honest. But thats such a massive gap in time it wouldn't even begin to make any difference. I wish I could be alive to discuss which race of humans first colonize a new galaxy... the point there is this:

Its much like arguing which Precambrian tribe first discovered some random cave way back when. It makes no real difference. Without any Historical gravity, it just screams pissing contest.

I think funding should be directed at finding out more about humans themselves.. not about which race "owns" or discovered America.

 

[usemeplease28]

I suspect it's because mitochondrial DNA can be obtained from both sexes -- both living donors and archeological sources.

It is possible to track the "Y" chromosome DNA and for the History Channel's recent program on Ghengis Khan, it has been done (his direct descendants number in the millions, FWIW.)

One other point in favor of using mDNA for tracking prehistoric migrations is that tracking patrilineal DNA through the Y chromosome is skewed by temporary conquests -- a lot of the aforementioned progeny of Ghengi Khan are in Eastern Europe where the Mogols "scattered their seed" and left several times. The ebb and flow of conquest and border conflicts can be traced through the yDNA, but it doesn't show much about migration patterns in the same area -- i.e. where the families and cultures settled and stayed or moved.

yes.. they follow the chromosome found in women that carries on almost flawlessly from generation to generation.. however the mutations are where the magic comes in.. it allows us to track specific mating patterns and shows who was fucking whom. Its very interesting and shows that there were 5 strains of dna they can see way back then... they called them simply A B C D and X... if I remember correctly. My bet is on Asians first. just a hunch tho.

 

[R. Richard]

Yeah, the polynesian theory has been around for awhile from what I can recall.

I think that we are so engrossed with our own technological skills that we have become arrogant to the point of stupidity. Personally I wouldn't doubt for a second that early "europeans" had access to north and/or south america.

I'm gonna look for references to a documentary I saw seveal years ago on the chemical analysis of red ocre used in cave and rock paintings throughout the coasts of North America and Europe. But the gist of it was that much of the red ocre was mined from one area in what is now France. It kinda fits with some of the other info coming to light.

And if we want to look at a less distant history, let's look at all the egyptian mummies which have been found to have cocaine and nicitine in their bodies. These compounds were only found in the western hemisphere.

Here's a few sites about that. Here and here

If you look at a world atlas, you will immediately see that the West coast of Africa in the areas around modern Freetown or Monrovia makes the closest approach to the South American continent. It is not impossible that very early Africans were caught in a storm off the West cost of Africa and blown to South America.

 

[Misty_Morning]

Its much like arguing which Precambrian tribe first discovered some random cave way back when. It makes no real difference. Without any Historical gravity, it just screams pissing contest.

I'm pretty sure there were no humans or proto-humans (or any vertebrates for that matter) during the Precambrian period....dude.

 

[usemeplease28]

I'm pretty sure there were no humans or proto-humans (or any vertebrates for that matter) during the Precambrian period....dude.

you never heard the term Precambrian man?
lol

 

[R. Richard]

I really don't see the point of arguing who was in the Americas first.. I'm interested in the first form of Human.

From a mostly visual reference... American Indians resemble a mix of Asian and Spanish to be honest. But thats such a massive gap in time it wouldn't even begin to make any difference. I wish I could be alive to discuss which race of humans first colonize a new galaxy... the point there is this:

The problem with 'who was in the Americas first' is actually a critical one. The discovery of Kennewick Man, an apparent non-Amerind who lived in South central Washington some 9300 years ago is an important one. However, the analysis of kenniwick Man has been held up for years because the Amerind people insist that Kennewick Man must be Amerind, becasue only Amerinds were in the Americas at the time when he was here. Thus, the remains of Kennewick Man must be re-buried according to Amerind custom.

In general, Amerinds are the descendents of pre-historic Siberian hunter-gatherer tribes. They first Amerinds came across the land bridge that connected Siberia with what is now Alaska. There are a number of scientific studies that have established the fact. However, the studies do not analyze any number of early groups that may have arrived upon the shores of the Americas tens of thousands of years ago.

 

[R. Richard]

What strikes me as the most interesting point is that the three oldest pre-clovis sites (at least those I know of) are about as far from the "ice bridge" as it's possible to get -- Pennsylvania, Florida, and Monte Verde, Chile -- and (relatively) near the coast.

I wonder what, if anything, is known about ice-age and pre-ice-age weather patterns and ocean currents -- modern weather and current patterns make sailing primitive boats from Europe to the carribean and polynesia to chile fairly easy.

The modern Japanese Current from southeast Asia through the gulf of Alaska and down the pacific coast tends to deposit things like Japanese fishing floats along the Oregon and northern California coast; it makes sailing from Asia to Oregon and California dead easy.

If the ice-age currents and weather patterns are similar to modern ones, almost anything that floats would suffice to bring small groups to the Americas by simple misadventure.

Actually, there are sites in Brazil that date back to up to 50,000 years ago. However, the Clovis Police have effectively prevented any real discussion of the findings.

The islands of Nippon [Japan] were obviously settled via boat. It is not all that much of a stretch to imagine a group sailing to Japan that is caught in a storm and swept across the Pacific to wind up in the Americas.

 

[usemeplease28]

The problem with 'who was in the Americas first' is actually a critical one. The discovery of Kennewick Man, an apparent non-Amerind who lived in South central Washington some 9300 years ago is an important one. However, the analysis of kenniwick Man has been held up for years because the Amerind people insist that Kennewick Man must be Amerind, becasue only Amerinds were in the Americas at the time when he was here. Thus, the remains of Kennewick Man must be re-buried according to Amerind custom.

In general, Amerinds are the descendents of pre-historic Siberian hunter-gatherer tribes. They first Amerinds came across the land bridge that connected Siberia with what is now Alaska. There are a number of scientific studies that have established the fact. However, the studies do not analyze any number of early groups that may have arrived upon the shores of the Americas tens of thousands of years ago.

Here is a link to the NOVA show about this...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/stoneage/clovis.html

It was great to watch and learn.. the woman didn't agree one bit, but nonetheless its great stuff on this topic.

I can understand unlocking secrets about our past.. but their motive seems to be a little narrow or like they are stuck wondering who was in America first.. rather than studying the origin of the people before they even came to America. FUCK.. shes talking about me giving her a clit and G spot orgasm at the same time again. I'm distracted. AHHHHHH

I think the study is worthwhile but get this feeling its gonna end in a pissing contest.

 

[usemeplease28]

Actually, there are sites in Brazil that date back to up to 50,000 years ago. However, the Clovis Police have effectively prevented any real discussion of the findings.

The islands of Nippon [Japan] were obviously settled via boat. It is not all that much of a stretch to imagine a group sailing to Japan that is caught in a storm and swept across the Pacific to wind up in the Americas.

LOL the "clovis police" wtf.
I wonder if I could apply for that on Monster.com

 

[R. Richard]

LOL the "clovis police" wtf.
I wonder if I could apply for that on Monster.com

'Clovis police' is a term commonly used in certain scientific circles. It may sound a bit strange, but it is the result of very hard pressure put on people who attempted to question the 'land bridge' immigration theory. Said pressure apparently caused the end of several promising careers.

 

[usemeplease28]

'Clovis police' is a term commonly used in certain scientific circles. It may sound a bit strange, but it is the result of very hard pressure put on people who attempted to question the 'land bridge' immigration theory. Said pressure apparently caused the end of several promising careers.

shit... why would we work against discovery.. AHHHH

 

[cloudy]

R.Richard, don't bother. This boy's as dumb as he is an asshole.

 

[usemeplease28]

R.Richard, don't bother. This boy's as dumb as he is an asshole.

R.Richard.. this tormentor has been following me from thread to thread in hopes of thwarting good discussion. Please use your own good judgment in these matters. We were having the start of a nice talk about our past.

 

[cloudy]

R.Richard.. this tormentor has been following me from thread to thread in hopes of thwarting good discussion. Please use your own good judgment in these matters. We were having the start of a nice talk about our past.

Boy, let me tell you something...

These people here know me. You got off on the wrong foot with your smartassed, bigoted comments. Why don't you go away now, before we embarass you any further?

As far as me following you around, remember this, boy: these are MY friends, not yours.

 

[usemeplease28]

The ignorant hag has now been ignored. please feel free to continue on with the topic.