Archaeologica.org

Yeah, you are right, he's probably better defined as a Solutrean firster and a proponent of marine adaption in the paleolithic. But more precisely, evolutionary archaeology theory.

None of the ones in the NW US are. I bet it's less prevalent than a lot of you think. A decade ago, yeah that was the case in at least some places. You don't see it in the journals either, well except for Stanford.

The time scale you refer to Mike has been raised here before as one of the most damning arguments against the later date for man's entry. It's so blindingly obvious that one has to wonder why some will stick to 'Clovis first', can't they see they have no argument against the time scale? Roy. Who is...

We now know there were First Americans long before any Solutrean people existed. Perhaps there were. Probably there were. But that doesn't preclude the Solutreans trekking along the ice pack edge to cross the Atlantic one bit. There's no reason why it can't be both true (it usually is...). The Solu...

I agree that the Clovis-first theory is dead. And that is why the Solutrean theory is dead as you could read in that well informed article since the Solutrean theory is totally dependent on the Clovis-first theory being correct. That is the point that is being made. We now know there were First Ame...

The Clovis first hypothesis is long dead. It doesn't do any good to keep resurrecting it to use as a straw man- like in that article.

Haven't heard of that one yet.

If you mean 12K conventional, that is pre-Clovis and is closer to when the NW coast was open at some 15,000 or 16,000 BP (conventional). 12K calibrated (10,000 BP conventional) is after Clovis and is getting towards the last gasp of paleolithic in NA except for on the plains where it lasted later du...

Digit, there may have been people that came down the ice free corridor, but it wasn't open yet when people first started arriving. The NW coast was largely an extension of Beringia and all the evidence suggests it supported a considerable biomass of large mammals including bison. They had plenty of ...

Yep, that is why there are so damn many fish bones in Clovis sites, oh wait, there aren't. Wait a minute, there aren't any! I guess they were just too damn stupid to figure it out. Those morons were too busy killing bison and mammoth to acknowledge that the marine environments are a handout, easy pi...

Cognito, there is no "link" to Optimal Foraging to provide. There are books listed at wiki though that you can get and read. You are arguing against it, but it is clear by your post that you really don't know anything about it in the first place. It is central to biological natural selecti...

I am not missing your point, I think your idea of what upper paleolithic means is off. It does not go hand in hand with sedentary people or marine adaption.

There are hundreds of shell midden sites on the NW coast, some of them approach two stories in thickness. Darn near without exception they are less than 3,000 years old, and of those, almost all are less than 2,000 years old. I would expect UK shell middens to be earlier. Middens are carbonate rich ...

Any new world sites from, say, 10,000 B.P. (conventional) that show marine adaption? There are lots that show big game specialists at work. How about the NW coast, where are all those pleistocene shell midden sites? Since you asked, here are a few: And even though you are apparently from the Pac NW...

Because that is what the sites say and the sea is not a wealth by any means. If you look at Optimal Foraging, you will see that marine adaption is actually quite expensive not something people did "just because." Bison antiquus were a wealth. Any new world sites from, say, 10,000 B.P. (con...