• New evidence shows humans in America 14,500 years ago.
    9 replies, posted
[quote]A team of archaeologists led by Jessi Halligan—an anthropologist who specializes in underwater archaeology at Florida State University—just completed an aquatic dig of the oldest archaeological site in the American Southeast. It's a deep sinkhole called the Page-Ladson Archaeological Site located just beyond the southeastern skirts of Tallahassee in the Aucilla River. Halligan's team found stone knives and mastodon bones, tusks and dung, leading the scientists to believe the mastodon was either butchered or scavenged at the site by humans. [B]Most interestingly, 71 individual radiocarbon dates show that the site is at least 14,550 years old—a full 1,500 years before many scientists recently believed humans first populated North America.[/B] The underwater dig was outlined today in the journal Science Advances. This new find is important, because many archaeologists had long believed that 13,000-year-old stone spearheads and other remains found in the 1920s in Clovis, New Mexico, represented the first wave of human settlers in North America. "For over 60 years, archaeologists accepted that Clovis were the first people to occupy the Americas... Today, this viewpoint is changing," says Michael Waters, an anthropologist at Texas A&M University who's part of the team. "The Page-Ladson site provides unequivocal evidence of human occupation that predates Clovis by over 1,500 years."[/quote] Source: [url]http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a20872/tools-mastodon-florida-underwater-archaeology/[/url] Isn't it accepted that Humans came in over from Russia through Alaska? Florida's a long way from there, but I guess a good place to preserve remains. So much swamp.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50316126]Source: [url]http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a20872/tools-mastodon-florida-underwater-archaeology/[/url] Isn't it accepted that Humans came in over from Russia through Alaska? Florida's a long way from there, but I guess a good place to preserve remains. So much swamp.[/QUOTE] humanity was born in the usa :terrists:
Ha take that narratives, us Europeans weren't invaders, we were settlers like the other native Americans! Until we started killing them I guess.... It's still crazy how much further they keep pushing these dates, the time difference is mind boggling, at this rate we will find that humans probably have covered the entire surface of the planet for 10k years before we even started developing technology
It has been suggested that several different cultures had visited the Americas and set up colonies all along the East and West coast. You have theories of Japanese sailors lost in tsunamis ending up in South America, Chinese fleets making voyages to the West coast, several cases for Phoenicians ending up in North America. The idea that humans only have inhabited this land mass for a certain point in time is quiet funny actually. I'd like to personally believe that with the invention of boats and canoes, it's more then likely that people have been crossing the oceans for quiet some time. Even without land bridges.
There's been [URL=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-evidence-suggests-stone-age-hunters-from-europe-discovered-america-7447152.html]increasing[/URL] [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Verde]evidence[/URL] (though not without problems) of settlers pre-dating those that crossed from Russia. It's been showing up for years now, actually- this isn't really a new idea on its own. One thought is that settlers from Europe crossed over a largely-frozen Atlantic. Then there are sites so far down in South America, thousands of years before the Siberian crossing, that it's anybody's guess how they got there. It's all really fascinating stuff.
It'd be cool if in the distant past, a highly advanced civilization used completely biodegradeable materials for everything, and now we know nothing about it cause it's all completely gone.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;50316925]There's been [URL=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-evidence-suggests-stone-age-hunters-from-europe-discovered-america-7447152.html]increasing[/URL] [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Verde]evidence[/URL] (though not without problems) of settlers pre-dating those that crossed from Russia. It's been showing up for years now, actually- this isn't really a new idea on its own. One thought is that settlers from Europe crossed over a largely-frozen Atlantic. Then there are sites so far down in South America, thousands of years before the Siberian crossing, that it's anybody's guess how they got there. It's all really fascinating stuff.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;50316287]It has been suggested that several different cultures had visited the Americas and set up colonies all along the East and West coast. You have theories of Japanese sailors lost in tsunamis ending up in South America, Chinese fleets making voyages to the West coast, several cases for Phoenicians ending up in North America. The idea that humans only have inhabited this land mass for a certain point in time is quiet funny actually. I'd like to personally believe that with the invention of boats and canoes, it's more then likely that people have been crossing the oceans for quiet some time. Even without land bridges.[/QUOTE] None of those hypotheses are accepted by serious historians, archaeologists, or anthropologists. There is no credible evidence that any Europeans visited North America prior to the Vikings. The idea that East Asians traveled to the Americas is even more quacky.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;50316925]There's been [URL=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-evidence-suggests-stone-age-hunters-from-europe-discovered-america-7447152.html]increasing[/URL] [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Verde]evidence[/URL] (though not without problems) of settlers pre-dating those that crossed from Russia. It's been showing up for years now, actually- this isn't really a new idea on its own. One thought is that settlers from Europe crossed over a largely-frozen Atlantic. Then there are sites so far down in South America, thousands of years before the Siberian crossing, that it's anybody's guess how they got there. It's all really fascinating stuff.[/QUOTE] Pretty much this. Clovis wasn't a new colony, it was a just a group moving around. [editline]14th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=daschnek;50317011]None of those hypotheses are accepted by serious historians, archaeologists, or anthropologists. There is no credible evidence that any Europeans visited North America prior to the Vikings. The idea that East Asians traveled to the Americas is even more quacky.[/QUOTE] No one said anything about about post-Clovis migrations or shipwrecks, but the idea that Amerinds just sprang into being is just as stupid as "ancient magic tech migrant fleet". They came from somewhere, and genetically speaking there are definite links to non-northern Amerind cultures of the same time.
[QUOTE=27X;50317106]Pretty much this. Clovis wasn't a new colony, it was a just a group moving around. [editline]14th May 2016[/editline] No one said anything about about post-Clovis migrations or shipwrecks, but the idea that Amerinds just sprang into being is just as stupid as "ancient magic tech migrant fleet". They came from somewhere, and genetically speaking there are definite links to non-northern Amerind cultures of the same time.[/QUOTE] Except the posts I quoted promote pseudo-history and pseudo-archeology. There is no credible evidence that migration to America happened any other way than via Beringia. Whether or not the Clovis culture was the first Paleo-Indian culture is a different matter.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.