Marine Archaeology

[Rokcet Scientist]

And again by those non-existant early seafarers.

'Cuz they walked !

[Digit]

Like they walked across the Sunda Strait you mean?

[Minimalist]

I'm sure the sharks loved that!

[Digit]

No problem there Min, if water was shallow enough for the dog to walk the sharks would have been walking as well.
The main argument, on a logical basis for man the sailor, is that only Man and hs dog made it across.
If the water, even at limited times of the moon cycle, were shallow enough for walking then other animals would have made it across, and that in BOTH directions.
If RS, or anybody else, can see an alternative to that I would like to here it.
Australia must have been isolated from Asia for many thousands of years for its unique flora and fauna to evolve. Look at what happened to the Marsupial mammals of SA once the Panama land bridge rose.

[Beagle]

You're right, of course, Digit. The entire argument about early seafaring was covered by Bednarik in his publication "Erectus Ahoy". I posted that article way back in the "Aborigine" thread (although not spelled correctly) in the beginning of this forum.

It is worth covering again I think. After so long, folks are unaware of established threads. Australia was settled by three different waves of humans, beginning at about 60,000 yrs. ago. And no land mass south of the Wallace Line was ever connected to a northern land mass since before primates evolved.

[Digit]

And some of the currents in that area Beag have taken a few ships over the years, those guys knew what they were doing alright.

[Beagle]

those guys knew what they were doing alright.

I don't know about that, except that three groups got there over a long period of time. The oldest group, naturally, exists in Tasmania.

In particular, Digit, your observation that every mammal in Oz is placental except for man and his dogs is pretty noteworthy, i.e. COOL.

Back later - I know I've been saying that but I've gotten terribly out of shape and "burnt out" sitting at a computer most of the day. I've been donating a lot of my time this summer and getting some exercise. I am feeling much better. I'll be posting as usual this fall.

[Rokcet Scientist]

If the water [...] were shallow enough for walking then other animals would have made it across, and that in BOTH directions.

Correct.
Which is why you find many marsupials in Papua and Sulawesi, for instance!

If RS, or anybody else, can see an alternative to that I would like to here it.

Man (HE) and his dog walked to Oz during low sea levels. There were 4 periods in the last half million years that he could have done so:



The last 'opportunity' was 50/60,000 years ago. Since then Oz' fauna developed/evolved in isolation into the morphs we see today.
European, Asian, African, and American fauna also developed/evolved in those 50/60,000 years. But, as we can see, in entirely different directions than Oz' fauna did.

Man (HE) and dog came to Oz together. Walking! They stayed together, and evolved together.
Hardly, to be sure!

Australia must have been isolated from Asia for many thousands of years for its unique flora and fauna to evolve.

Correct. It was.
For a minimum of 50,000 years to be precise.

Look at what happened to the Marsupial mammals of SA once the Panama land bridge rose.

That was 4 million years ago, Dig!
In 4 million years a lot more happens/develops/evolves than it does in 50,000 years!

[Digit]

The point about the Panama land bridge is not the date RS, but what happened to SA Marsupials as a result. The majority quickly became extinct, as is happening to a large degree in Oz now.
Marsupials in Papua? Of course, Papua was contiguous with Oz when the sea levels dropped, they were one land mass and Marsupials colonised the whole area, but they got no further!
Why? Because your shallow seas were still a couple of hundred ft deep between Indonesia and the Oz Papua land mass!
Check an oceanographic map against depths and relative sea levels if you won't take my word for it.
You have still to explain how only two placental mammal species made it there when other species that were better adapted to swimming or wading, species that made it to other islands, but were halted north of the Oz Papuan land mass.
Explain that Please!

[Rokcet Scientist]

The point about the Panama land bridge is not the date RS, but what happened to SA Marsupials as a result. The majority quickly became extinct, as is happening to a large degree in Oz now.

Which clearly indicates that the marsupial 'concept' can only thrive in isolation. Confronted with 'evolutionary competition' from placentals they whither.

Marsupials in Papua? Of course, Papua was contiguous with Oz when the sea levels dropped, they were one land mass and Marsupials colonised the whole area, but they got no further!

They didn't?
So what are they doing in Sulawesi today?

Why? Because your shallow seas were still a couple of hundred ft deep between Indonesia and the Oz Papua land mass!
Check an oceanographic map against depths and relative sea levels if you won't take my word for it.

Not only were sea levels much lower than today, Dig, 'land' – the earth's crust in SE Asia – was much higher in altitude then. It has been sinking ever since. And still does today.
Seas were lower, land was higher, so they could walk from Burma to Oz! Always along the shorelines, catching fish and collecting mussels and other shellfish, and seaweeds!, for food.
That led them automatically to Oz, eventually.

You have still to explain how only two placental mammal species made it there when other species that were better adapted to swimming or wading, species that made it to other islands, but were halted north of the Oz Papuan land mass.
Explain that Please!

Obviously I don't know, but here's a theory:
those placentals that did make it to Oz were killed off – eaten! – by the Abo's?
Like HSS killed off NA megafauna?
Abo's had at least 50,000 years to 'achieve' that. NA HSS needed 'only' maybe 5,000 or 10,000 years max to wipe out the NA megafauna.

[Digit]

A commonly held opinion is that the Bear Cuscus rafted to Sulawesi on a mat of vegetation (evolutionary estimates of time range from 11,000 years ago1 to 30 million years ago3).

Rafted, not walked.

obviously I don't know, but here's a theory:
those placentals that did make it to Oz were killed off – eaten! – by the Abo's?
Like HSS killed off NA megafauna?

And never a trace of their existance to substatiate your theory. I'll stick to known facts not wild theories I think.
And we still don't know for certain that HSS did kill off the NA mega fuana either.

[Minimalist]

No problem there Min, if water was shallow enough for the dog to walk the sharks would have been walking as well.

Most shark attacks take place in shallow water. WE had a map a while back which showed that the Sunda Strait was never dry. I don't feel like going to look for it now, though.

[Digit]

Granted that most shark attacks take place in shallow water Min, that's because the object of their attacks are in shallow water.
The Sunda's shallowest part is about 600ft deep, so taking the water level down 400ft still leaves 200ft and if the land is rising as RS states then 18000yrs ago the water would have been more than 200ft deep, a bit much for walking I think.
As Beag pointed out earlier, the Wallace line has stood the test of time much better many other theories.

[Minimalist]

Granted that most shark attacks take place in shallow water Min, that's because the object of their attacks are in shallow water.

That's because sharks are smarter than Bush. They look for their prey where they are....not where they aren't!

[Digit]

That certainly has many advantages Min.