Deleted

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 12:58 pm

Know of any other old skulls from the Americas?

Yes. the Dorenberg skull, knowledge of which was rescued from obscurity by diatomist Sam VanLandingham (Corroboration of Sangamonian age of artifacts from the Valsequillo region, Puebla, Mexico by means of diatom biostratigraphy, 2004, micropaleontology 50:4, 313-342.) It was on display in as museum in Leipzig and was destroyed during the bombing of the city during WWII. We are still looking for a photo of it. A kind colleague, a retired professor of German from my old college, made contact with the museum staff while doing research there a couple of years ago. He was able to find out some information. It should come up eventually on my website.

Then there¹s the skull cap Al Bryan found in the 70s, from Lagoa Santa, Brazil. (Bryan, A.L., ed., 1978, Early Man in America from a CircumPacific Perspective, Occasional Papers No. 1, Dept. of Anthropology, U. of Alberta, Edmonton, pp. 318 ff. See photos, p. 319.) It has disappeared.

And the Ostrander skull, a photo of which was sent to me by Prof. Charles Ostrander of Merced College, CA in the early 70s. See my 2002 Early Man Symposium (Mexico City) talk/paper on the website for the photo. At the time I thought it was the skull cap rumored to have been collected illegally from Hueyatlaco during the late 60s or early 70s and stored at the college, but found out my information source was unreliable and am left with egg on my face on that one. But the Ostrander skull [cap] (calotte?) is still important. See a copy of a PS I¹ve added to a recent DVD sent to colleagues:

³As usual, new data keep arriving that modify some of the files. The Ostrander skull photo seems now not to be the photo of the skull cap removed from Hueyatlaco, but rather that of skull 19, Tuo (Tuolumne County?), . . . ³one of several ambiguous skulls². . . collected by [the late] Charles Ostrander in central California., and stored [1976] at Merced College, 3600 M. Street, Merced, CA 95340 I recently found a xerox copy of the skull photo where I had added this information, typed, to the bottom. I am still looking for a copy of Professor Ostrander¹s transmittal letter [dated February, 1976].

³This leaves of interest to the Mexican project the Dorenberg skull (lots of diatom data, but no picture or drawing of it has been uncovered to date), and Professor Solorzano¹s skull fragments with massive brow ridges from the Guadalajara area.²

I believe the Ostrander skull and the other ³ambiguous skulls² were given to a local Native American tribe for reburial. I have been unable to get any information out of the college; perhaps you would have better luck.

A final possible lead, this from the Australian magazine NEXUS (July-August 2003, p.55). Here the author quotes from a book called American Indian Myths and Mysteries, by Vincent H. Gaddis (1977):

³In 1968 two Neanderthal-like skulls with low foreheads and large brows were found in Minnesota. As for the dating, University of Minnesota scientists said they were reluctant to destroy any of the material, although carbon-14 testing only requires the burning of one gram of bone. They were sent to the Smithsonian. Later, Dr. Lawrence Angel, curator of physical anthropology at the institution, said he had no record of the skulls there, although he was sure they were not lost.²

Steen-McIntyre

http://www.valsequilloclassic.net/Forum ... 86f6cc677a

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 1:17 pm

These deposits contain many diatoms which indicate an age corresponding to the Sangamonian Interglacial sensu lato (80,000 to ca. 220,000yr BP). Two of the four samples in this study are associated with the Dorenberg skull or with stratigraphic units which contain bifacial tools.

Sam L. VanLandingham

http://micropal.geoscienceworld.org/cgi ... t/50/4/313

The latest dating, by Farley and Renne, now place the deposits, in which the Dorenberg skull was found, between 400,000 B.P. - 1,100,000 B.P. The bifacial tools were found in the same context:

VanLandingham's latest research also pushes the minimum date back to, possibly, the Illinoian:

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)

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:20 pm

Cognito · Post by **Cognito** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 7:05 pm

Charlie, Solarzano's skullcap and the Dorenberg skull among others indicates an erectus-like presence in the Americas. However, most archaeologists will tell you that no bones have found to date. Further, they will state that erectus was incapable of surviving in an arctic environment and therefore could not have crossed the Bering land bridge during an earlier ice age. On the contrary, see here:

http://www.archaeology.org/9705/newsbriefs/siberia.html

Further, it doesn't take too long to float by raft from Africa to South America on the prevailing current (less than three weeks?). I suspect that if more archaeologists had an open mind and were willing to look for older remains, they would find them.

Another argument I have read goes like this: "If ancient man was in the Americas, we would find spots littered with tools -- we don't." The Calico area fits that description and so do a few other sites. However, when the tools are found, they are called "geofacts" since they aren't supposed to be here (yes, circular reasoning). I cannot believe that Mother Nature bothers to make a nicely formed bifacial hand-axe with a dozen or more percussion strikes on each side. I think this guy made them instead:

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 7:37 pm

Charlie, Solarzano's skullcap and the Dorenberg skull among others indicates an erectus-like presence in the Americas.

Yes sir.
Certainly seems to be the case, with the evidence we have to date.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 7:52 pm

Yes sir, someday people are going to learn not to send priceless but inconvenient artifacts to the CLUB where they keep disappearing.

I wonder why that is?

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 8:21 pm

I'm betting on Erectus. He was the original traveling man.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 8:54 pm

Clovis-First has powerful allies!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/us/10 ... ner=EXCITE

Project intends to collect 100,000 indigenous DNA samples. But for four months, the project has been on hold here as it scrambles to address questions raised by a group that oversees research involving Alaska natives.

At issue is whether scientists who need DNA from aboriginal populations to fashion a window on the past are underselling the risks to present-day donors. Geographic origin stories told by DNA can clash with long-held beliefs, threatening a world view some indigenous leaders see as vital to preserving their culture.

They argue that genetic ancestry information could also jeopardize land rights and other benefits that are based on the notion that their people have lived in a place since the beginning of time.

“What if it turns out you’re really Siberian and then, oops, your health care is gone?” said Dr. David Barrett, a co-chairman of the Alaska Area Institutional Review Board, which is sponsored by the Indian Health Service, a federal agency. “Did anyone explain that to them?”

The truth is less important than mythology.

It usually is.

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:08 am

They argue that genetic ancestry information could also jeopardize land rights and other benefits that are based on the notion that their people have lived in a place since the beginning of time.

“What if it turns out you’re really Siberian and then, oops, your health care is gone?” said Dr. David Barrett, a co-chairman of the Alaska Area Institutional Review Board, which is sponsored by the Indian Health Service, a federal agency. “Did anyone explain that to them?”

Wow!

I never thought about these issues. You can bet your butt these guys don't want to know the truth!

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:19 am

Of course not....you've been too busy bleeding on geological formations!

Cognito · Post by **Cognito** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:16 am

The Nevada Pah-Ute Tribe has been blocking the re-examination of the Spirit Cave Man for some time:

http://www.cabrillo.edu/~crsmith/spiritman2.html

And this bust reproduction shows why:

http://www.cabrillo.edu/~crsmith/spiritman.html

The tribe also admits to exterminating a race of tall, red-haired people they calle the Si-Te-Cah:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si-Te-Cah

Any race of "giants" probably refers to people who were 6 feet tall or more. The average Mojave Native living near Needles, California on the Colorado River in early 1800s was about 6'6" tall since the tribe continuously bred for height. John C. Fremont was guided through Spanish California in 1844 by Kit Carson and a Mojave Tribe Guide who stood about 6'8" and looked down on the whites as inferior [Ref: Mohahve Historical Society].

Bruce · Post by **Bruce** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:22 am

http://www.mysterious-america.net/biminihoax.html

The Ancient Bimini Harbor: Uncovering the Great Bimini Hoax

Dr. Greg Little

In May 2005, a team of researchers, including archaeologist William Donato, made an extensive expedition to both Bimini and Andros in the Bahamas. A 73-minute DVD "amateur" documentary was made to document the expedition and its results. In brief, at a second site about one mile from the formation known as the "Bimini Road," numerous stone circles were found along with stone anchors, wood under some of the large stones, and cut blocks of stone. This particular site is almost completely unknown.

At the Bimini Road, numerous multiple tiers of stones were found, prop stones were found under the massive blocks, and cut rectangular slabs of stone were found literally stacked under some of the large blocks. A variety of other human artifacts were found including two dozen pieces of gray marble—found under a large block. The results indicate that the Bimini formation was once an ancient harbor, nearly identical in size, shape, and construction to many that have been found and verified in the Mediterranean.

Follow-up research on what skeptical geologists and one archaeologist have written uncovered a hoax that falsified reports on the site utilizing pseudoscience. In brief, what popular archaeology textbooks have asserted about the site isn't true. The root of the hoax was traced to U. S. Geological Survey geologist Eugene Shinn and archaeologist Marshall McKusick. In fact, Eugene Shinn's original 1978 report actually detailed results that point to the Bimini Road being manmade. The documentation of the hoax is clear and definitive, but it is more than likely that skeptics will deride and dismiss the evidence with no investigation. The details of the story are intriguing.

Club Geology challenged. Looks pretty convincing to me.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:46 am

It's going to have to wait until I get home to a real computer....a 720k attachment would cause this p-o-s to explode.

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:47 am

Of course not....you've been too busy bleeding on geological formations!

LMAO!!

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:48 am

The Club will tell you to wear gloves, Charlie, so you stop contaminating the rocks.

Archaeologica.org

Deleted

Erectus

Native American Remains