Archaeologica.org

A 15,000-16,000 year old human footprint has been identified in Chile....

https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-hi ... nt-0011809

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/artic ... ne.0213572

Fascinating.

"Early human occupation in southern South America (Patagonia) has been the focus of intense debate over the recent years. Current detailed chronologies show that human presence in the area can be traced back as far as ∼15 kyr [2,10] with a period of ∼3500 years of coexistence with extinct megafauna. This suggests a complex dynamic between climatic and human-made environmental changes, occurring coevally at the end of the Pleistocene [61,62]. The human trace finding in Pilauco, ichnologically characterised as Hominipes modernus, adds a new and independent line of evidence on the colonisation of northern Patagonia, as has been continuously defended for more than 40 years by now based on scientific findings from the neighbouring Monte Verde site.

Is he saying humans have been responsible for climatic change for 15,000 years?
Or that climatic change was responsible for human change?

kbs2244 wrote:"Early human occupation in southern South America (Patagonia) has been the focus of intense debate over the recent years. Current detailed chronologies show that human presence in the area can be traced back as far as ∼15 kyr [2,10] with a period of ∼3500 years of coexistence with extinct megafauna. This suggests a complex dynamic between climatic and human-made environmental changes, occurring coevally at the end of the Pleistocene [61,62]. The human trace finding in Pilauco, ichnologically characterised as Hominipes modernus, adds a new and independent line of evidence on the colonisation of northern Patagonia, as has been continuously defended for more than 40 years by now based on scientific findings from the neighbouring Monte Verde site.

Is he saying humans have been responsible for climatic change for 15,000 years?
Or that climatic change was responsible for human change?

Human beings alter their environment. So do beavers, elephants & various other mammals. The environment also shapes its denizens. It's a two way street. Get over it.

Environment is far different than climate

A beaver pond is affected by snow melt, but it doesn't cause it.
Elephants can die of thirst if the rains do not come.

kbs2244 wrote:Environment is far different than climate

A beaver pond is affected by snow melt, but it doesn't cause it.
Elephants can die of thirst if the rains do not come.

An environment, any environment, is affected by climate.

Humans & some mammals can change their environment to mitigate the effects of said climate.

Beavers build dams to create wetlands where there were none before. They also open up dense woodlands by felling trees

Elephants can change a dense woodland into an open savanna by pushing down unwanted trees.

Humans create terraces & irrigation canals. Humans can also change dense woodland into open farmland by slash & burn strategies. They can drain wetlands. They can dredge to deepen river channels.

This is not a woo-woo mystery stuff. It's well documented.

kbs2244 wrote:"Early human occupation in southern South America (Patagonia) has been the focus of intense debate over the recent years. Current detailed chronologies show that human presence in the area can be traced back as far as ∼15 kyr [2,10] with a period of ∼3500 years of coexistence with extinct megafauna. This suggests a complex dynamic between climatic and human-made environmental changes, occurring coevally at the end of the Pleistocene [61,62]. The human trace finding in Pilauco, ichnologically characterised as Hominipes modernus, adds a new and independent line of evidence on the colonisation of northern Patagonia, as has been continuously defended for more than 40 years by now based on scientific findings from the neighbouring Monte Verde site.

Is he saying humans have been responsible for climatic change for 15,000 years?
Or that climatic change was responsible for human change?

The excerpt you quoted was footnoted( 61 and 62) Examining those footnoted articles may provide an answer to your question:

https://www.pnas.org/content/101/25/9297

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/6/e1501682

I read the first footnote, but the time frames didn't match.
I skipped the second assuming it reinforced the first.
My bad.

If I read the second correctly. man followed the climate change?