Texas A&M's Dating of Artifacts Discovered at Hueyataco,

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:37 pm

News Flash!!

A&M has informally announced the results of it's dating for the artifacts found in situ at Hueyatlaco, Unit I:

Older than 1,000,000 B.P.

I wonder how long it will take for them to announce these dates publicly? The bifacial tools, found ca. 1 meter above the unifacial tools and assigned to Cro-Magnon, and the associated strata in which they were found, are hotly contested. It's basically a shoot out between Texas A&M and the USGS. USGS claims the strata are greater than 250,000 B.P.

Here's the current project write-up, from Texas A&M's website:

Quote:

Hueyatlaco, Mexico

Several potential pre-Clovis localities were found in the 1960s around the edge of the Valsequillo Reservoir, Mexico. One of these localities is the site of Hueyatlaco. This site was excavated by Cynthia Irwin-Williams in 1962, 1964, and 1966. At this site, numerous unifacial flake tools were found with extinct fauna. Questions about the stratigraphy, location of the artifacts, and dating have plague this site. In 2003, a trip was made to the Smithsonian Archives in Maryland and the files of Cynthia Irwin-Williams were examined. Numerous maps and files were photocopied and this Excavations at the Hueyatlaco sitematerial was used to reconstruct the excavations conducted at the site in 1962, 1964, and 1966. Field investigations were undertaken during May and June of 2004 at Hueyatlaco. Three trenches were excavated at the site in order to examine and evaluate the stratigraphy at Hueyatlaco. We were able to confirm that the Hueyatlaco Ash did indeed overlie what was reported to be the unifacial artifact-bearing deposits (Bed I). An unconformity separated the alluvium containing the bifacial material (Bed E and C). Samples of the Hueyatlaco Ash and other units are being dated by the Ar-Ar and luminescence techniques. These dates will resolve once and for all the age of this important site. This research is being done in collaboration with Joaquin Arroyo-Cabrales (INAH), Patricia Ochoa-Castillo (National Museum of Anthropology), and Mario Perez-Campa (INAH).

http://www.centerfirstamericans.org/res ... t_projects

Do you guys expect a backpeddling by A&M? Note the highlighted portion of A&M's write up currently on their official website. Do you think they might come up with a way to discredit Cynthia Irwin-Williams, enabling them to retract their statement, without making their investigations in 2004 appear in error?

My guess is yes, they will try to discredit CIW's work. If so, that would be an all time low. I certainly hope this is not the case. I guess we'll wait for the official announcement...perhaps at The Third Mexican Early Man Conference, in Mexico later this month.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:09 pm

Wow, Charlie. Talk about stirring up a shit storm! Thanks for posting.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:10 pm

Charlie that is really exciting news. Thanks. I'm with you though - I won't be a bit surprised to see these results withdrawn. It's happened before.

I'm going to miss a lot of the good discussion about this because I'm on vacation. Before I turn in I'm gonna go over to Virginia Steen-Mcyntires' website and see if this has been posted. I don't imagine that she'll ever get an apology, but this has to be exciting for her.

Thanks again Charlie.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:21 pm

VSM recently was notified by colleagues that her early work was corroborated - fantastic.

Charlie also posted this on her website and I'm lifting it - I'm sure he won't mind.

VanLandingham, S.L., 2006, Diatom evidence for autochthonous artifact deposition in the Valsequillo region, Puebla, Mexico during the Sangamonian (sensu lato = 80,000 to ca 220,000 yr BP and Illinoian (220,000 to 430,000 yr BP). J. Paleolimnol, 36, 101-116.

Journal of Paleolimnology
Diatom evidence for autochthonous artifact deposition in the Valsequillo region, Puebla, Mexico during the Sangamonian (sensu lato = 80,000 to ca. 220,000 yr BP and Illinoian (220,000 to 430,000 yr BP))
Journal Journal of Paleolimnology
Publisher Springer Netherlands
ISSN 0921-2728 (Print) 1573-0417 (Online)
Subject Earth and Environmental Science
Issue Volume 36, Number 1 / July, 2006
Category Original Paper
DOI 10.1007/s10933-006-0008-4
Pages 101-116
Online Date Saturday, July 29, 2006

Here we have a mainstream science journal publishing a well-reasoned paper, written by a well-respected paleontologist, arguing for human existence in North America between 220,000 BP-430,000 BP. In light of the 335,000 BP report to Caltrans and the 400,000 BP report from the U.K. by well respected, mainstream paleontologists and archeologists, I think any open minded individual must seriously consider the plausibility of human existence in North America contemporaneously with the earliest of Neanderthals and the latter of Homo heidelbergensis

I'll do my best to be around here tomorrow evening - save a little conversation for me folks.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:34 pm

You do know what is going to happen when The Club hears about this, don't you?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:29 am

You do know what is going to happen when The Club hears about this, don't you?

the non existent club didn't have a problem with these dates the last time
Virginias problems stemmed from her interpretation of who was responsible for the artifacts
so this is no news at all
grasping at straws again

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:58 am

Charlie that is really exciting news. Thanks. I'm with you though - I won't be a bit surprised to see these results withdrawn. It's happened before.

I'm going to miss a lot of the good discussion about this because I'm on vacation. Before I turn in I'm gonna go over to Virginia Steen-Mcyntires' website and see if this has been posted. I don't imagine that she'll ever get an apology, but this has to be exciting for her.

Thanks again Charlie.

Yeah Beagle, I don't see any great epiphany occuring. My prediction is they will slump to an all time low, by discrediting one of their own: Cynthia Irwin-Williams, the archeologist in charge of the original excavation. Guess we'll see when/ if they make a formal announcement. I certainly hope I'm wrong.

Barracuda · Post by **Barracuda** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 9:55 am

It is exciting, and I will keep an open mind, but...

I am always skeptical about anything dated by geological layers. It doesn't mean the artifact is a million years old, only that it is found in a geological layer that was one million years old. The stone artifacts themselves can not be dated.

And with flint artifacts, especially one sided ones, there is always a possibility that they are natural.

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 9:55 am

My prediction is they will slump to an all time low, by discrediting one of their own:

Traitors are usually dealt with more harshly than enemy soldiers. The Club hates traitors even more than outsiders.

Barracuda · Post by **Barracuda** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:03 am

I should note that the "club" does seem to accept this type of evidence very readily when it supports mainstream theories, and reject it when it does not....

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:24 pm

Hopefully time will tell. We'll see if they make a formal announcement or not.

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Oct 17, 2006 10:03 am

Let us know if they do, Charlie?

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:22 am

Sure Will, Min.

How's the gun collecting going? Any new, sweet finds recently?

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:46 pm

Charlie Hatchett wrote:Sure Will, Min.

How's the gun collecting going? Any new, sweet finds recently?

NO, but it just got cool enough out here to think about heading out to the range and burning up some powder.

Muzzle loaders are far too 'labor intensive' to use in the heat.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:12 pm

Thanks again Charlie. It looks like we can only wait and see if these findings are published.

When I get home I'll try contacting a few people and see if I can get any more info. Keep up the good work Charlie. I'm probably just going to keep sittin' on my ass.