Pre-Columbian settlement.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:38 am

http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/plate ... s/ap5.html

Charlie I've never heard of this site. There is precious little on the net too that actually talks about the skeleton.

You folks in Texas are finding a strange group of humans it seems. It doesn't seem to be getting a lot of press outside of Texas though, even though this woman was found back in the 80s.

This is really interesting. Are there other discoveries down there that we may not know about?

Digit · Post by **Digit** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:46 am

In the 80s?! What did they do? Bury her again. Over here it's been suggested that some info has been given a low profile so as not to upset native Americans. Is that so?

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:51 am

http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/plate ... s/ap5.html

Charlie I've never heard of this site. There is precious little on the net too that actually talks about the skeleton.

You folks in Texas are finding a strange group of humans it seems. It doesn't seem to be getting a lot of press outside of Texas though, even though this woman was found back in the 80s.

This is really interesting. Are there other discoveries down there that we may not know about?

You have to wonder, after the whole Kennewick thing, if the researchers are keeping it on the "down low", until full analyses are complete. Bosque Man was found in the 70's, but just now publicized.

This is really interesting. Are there other discoveries down there that we may not know about?

I'll have to think over that a bit.

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:52 am

In the 80s?! What did they do? Bury her again. Over here it's been suggested that some info has been given a low profile so as not to upset native Americans. Is that so?

We were both thinking the same thing, at the same time.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:58 am

You folks in Texas are finding a strange group of humans it seems

Yeah....and then they elect them.

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:03 pm

Minimalist wrote: Yeah....and then they elect them.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:07 pm

You folks in Texas are finding a strange group of humans it seems

What a straightline - there are multiple punch lines to that one.

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:26 am

Yeah....and then they elect them.

What a straightline - there are multiple punch lines to that one.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:16 pm

Charlie Hatchett wrote:
Neat Charlie. That's an interesting mystery. Heres another article on him.

http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/002007.html
Nice article, Beag.

I'm a dummy when it comes to bones, but to my untrained eye, Bosque Man looks as if he has a bit of Erectus, or Archaic Sapien in him.

H. erectus

Bosque Man

This .pdf shows his features a bit better:

http://www.texas-ec.org/publications/do ... cp0107.pdf

Charlie, in your travels around the 'net, does anybody think the Bosque county man has Kennewick Man features?

We looked at this skull, and the recreation, a long time ago it seems, but I can't remember where.

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:50 pm

Charlie, in your travels around the 'net, does anybody think the Bosque county man has Kennewick Man features?

We looked at this skull, and the recreation, a long time ago it seems, but I can't remember where.

I do remember the discussion from a while back. I'll have to track down our old discussion.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:02 pm

Well, don't go to any trouble Charlie. I just wondered if the comparison to Kennewick man rang any bells. Guess it doesn't.

I just keep going back to look at that skull and thinking that I'm missing something. (probably another straight line for Min.).

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:07 pm

I just keep going back to look at that skull and thinking that I'm missing something.

Archaic Sapiens in N.A., Naaahhh, your not missing anything significant.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:46 pm

from what i've seen this skull is dated at 10,000 bp
thats only 90,000 years after homo sapiens archaic went extinct
now am i missing something here ?

Bosque man

sapiens sapiens skull

sapiens archaic skull
so what gives ?
you been daydreaming again ?

Charlie Hatchett · Post by **Charlie Hatchett** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:22 pm

so what gives ?

uhhh....the pronounced browridge?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:48 pm

might help if you labelled your images Charlie