Very Early Seafaring?

[E.P. Grondine]

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/ ... iterranean

[Minimalist]

Early members of the human family such as Homo erectus are now known to have crossed several kilometers of deep water more than a million years ago in Indonesia, to islands such as Flores and Sulawesi. Modern humans braved treacherous waters to reach Australia by 65,000 years ago. But in both cases, some archaeologists say early seafarers might have embarked by accident, perhaps swept out to sea by tsunamis.

Jesus. Are they still trotting that nonsense out. Just admit it. HE built BOATS!

What's next? Vegetation mats?

[kbs2244]

They give their bow to their instructors.

“But in both cases, some archaeologists say early seafarers might have embarked by accident, perhaps swept out to sea by tsunamis.”

But it is clearly a polite CYA.

[circumspice]

I find it hilarious that they would expect people to believe that an entire, viable breeding population could ever be accidentally transported via tsunami wave, to be deposited on the shores of a distant island, then survive long enough to leave evidence of their presence in the archaeological record. Then repeat that process for every distant land mass that has what they consider anomalous artifacts in the archaeological record. REALLY?

We are not talking about small bodied mammals or reptiles that could possibly survive such a transport mechanism. If elephants can swim between islands, why couldn't humans & their predecessors lash a few logs together, put the kids & some food on those rafts & head out to an island that they can see in the distance? Or maybe even follow birds to an island they can't see yet?

What's the big deal here? Humans are an apex predator for good reason. We have opposible thumbs & large brains. We are capable of communicating abstract ideas. We are capable of innovation & invention. We are capable of cooperative behavior. We have immense curiosity & wanderlust. We spread throughout all the continents in a very brief span of time, in relative terms.

In my opinion, the naysayers have a bias against any modern human predecessor because they want our species to be viewed as the crown of creation. The epitome, the pinnacle of a long arduous evolutionary process that culminated in 'us'. They want the rest to be viewed as somehow inferior & left behind in the race to become the perfect & only surviving sentient species on the planet. To admit to anything less is heresy.

Pffft!!!

[Simon21]

Early members of the human family such as Homo erectus are now known to have crossed several kilometers of deep water more than a million years ago in Indonesia, to islands such as Flores and Sulawesi. Modern humans braved treacherous waters to reach Australia by 65,000 years ago. But in both cases, some archaeologists say early seafarers might have embarked by accident, perhaps swept out to sea by tsunamis.

Having had the profound misfortune of bering in a country hit by the great Pacific Tsunami I cannot recall anyone suggesting it made a handy way to travel.

And even if it did you would surely need whole group to hitch a ride.

[Minimalist]

It's called "grasping at straws" by the gang which simply refuses to admit that HE was pretty damn capable of living in their world.

[E.P. Grondine]

Just a few notes on this.

min, it would have been dugouts, not boats.

We have had an excavation bias towards Africa and the earliest sites.
The landscape was quite different in early times due to lower sea levels, so early coastal sites have not been looked at all.
Then you have impact mega-tsunami effects on sites slightly inland as well.
China had been unworked due to the chaos there. That chaos is over, and there is funding now.

I expect that work will certainly be done on very early sites along the coasts in Saudi Arabia.
Coastal India? India is pretty poor and faces massive problems.
SE Asia? Tough to work because of the depth, but the finds at that impact site in Malaysia are going to be worked.

Be sure to watch my video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCD9u7XGC8w

[Cognito]

Circumspice wrote: "I find it hilarious that they would expect people to believe that an entire, viable breeding population could ever be accidentally transported via tsunami wave, to be deposited on the shores of a distant island, then survive long enough to leave evidence of their presence in the archaeological record. Then repeat that process for every distant land mass that has what they consider anomalous artifacts in the archaeological record. REALLY?"

Anthropologist John Moore of the Univ. of Florida addressed this question a few years ago with his Ethnopop program. Establishing a diverse, successful population in a new, unpopulated area requires about 80 people (i.e. 40 couples) to prevent an inevitable extinction. People went places on purpose, H erectus or otherwise, and to assume that a tsunami did it requires some serious therapy.

[Minimalist]

Hey, Cogs. How the hell are you?

[circumspice]

I don't see how anyone can spew the tsunami transport hypothesis with a straight face. I certainly couldn't.

For what it's worth, the type of watercraft used wouldn't need to be elaborate or advanced. As long as it could float & bear the weight of people & supplies, just about anything will do. I bet that two or three large tree trunks tied together would probably be adequate for short distances.

[Cognito]

Hey, Cogs. How the hell are you?

Hey Min, doing much better than those archaics who rode the tsunami to Australia.

Keeping busy and out of trouble (most of the time). And you? You ready for this summer's heat?

[Minimalist]

Oh, yeah. There were times over the winter when I was complaining about the cold. The old joints just can take the chill anymore. Give me a little triple-digits!