Page 3 of 55
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:26 pm
by MichelleH
Now look what you've done.....set Steve loose again....
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:07 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
deleted
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:24 pm
by Minimalist
That looks well worn.
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:50 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
Deleted
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:08 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
Deleted
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 6:33 pm
by Minimalist
Just curious but have you ever tried to make one of those and see what it can be used to cut?
You know, see how effective it would be at cutting down a small tree or something?
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:02 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
deleted
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:09 pm
by stan
Be sure someone sober is standing by to call 911 and apply tourniquets.
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:33 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
deleted
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:34 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
deleted
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:11 pm
by Minimalist
stan wrote:Be sure someone sober is standing by to call 911 and apply tourniquets.
Solid advice, Stan.
Sounds like a good idea.
Science is about experimentation but the trouble with archaeology is that it is damned hard to figure out what to experiment on. Add in the fact that the act of digging up a site destroys the site and there is your dilemma. But, yeah...I'd love to try something like that.
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:16 am
by Charlie Hatchett
deleted
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:19 am
by Charlie Hatchett
deleted
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 9:23 am
by Minimalist
Yes, but again, isn't the carbonate one of your prime dating mechanisms? Once you remove it, all you have is a sharp rock.
Maybe suspend a rock in a vinegar solution so that only part of the edge is cleaned and photograph the whole process? That way, if the cleaned part of the edge shows knapping you'll still have the natural part for dating.
I was thinking about this last night. Knowing that flint is sharp but brittle from my black powder shooting I was wondering how much abuse a stone edge could take if used to cut down a tree or shape wood? I don't think ancient people were inherently stupid. In fact, they probably had a more practical knowledge of their little worlds than we do today. So, it is a simple question of efficiency that if it takes x number of hours to make a stone tool and you can only use it for two or three swings at a tree before it crumbles away that would not seem to be an efficient use of resources... especially in an era when survival was dependent on such resources.
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:33 pm
by Bruce
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 030607.php\
There's a scholarly debate brewing about whether pre-Columbian Amazonian populations settled in large numbers across Amazonia and created the modern forest setting that many conservationists take to be ‘natural.'
I tend to believe the human occupation to be about 1.28 million bce
Charlie, you need to put dates on all these rocks. pre-clovis just doesn't cut it anymore.