I think it's an important debate, also, Stan. I think one of the fundamental problems is how the "artifacts" are viewed. If they're viewed through known Paleo-Indian lithics "lenses", then they're not going to look anything like them.Looks like this will be an important debate.
Also relates directly to your site, Charlie, because the Walker
artifacts (?) have been found in a gravel stratum very similar to yours, and the establishment group is claiming that the pieces in question were formed naturally.
I see in your case that there is big difference between the gravels and
the possible tools. It would seem to me that if they were naturally
chipped gravels that they would be surrounded by other similarly chipped ones, since all of them were subjected to similar forces.
However, Aflinson (spelling?) makes a good point that the site should be compared to another geologically similar spot to see if there is a similar distribution of "tools." He is betting there will be...and that this would prove that they are natural....because presumably a campsite or toolmaking site would have been a rarity. I'm not convinced by this argument, however.
But think about it. Would there have been thousands of these tools?
And what about the "washout" idea. Could your tools or those in Minnesota have been swept away by a glacial flood and scattered among natural gravel in this way?
I'm staying tuned.
The pieces here in central Texas, Calico and the pieces I've seen from Minnesota are "Old World" technology: bipolar reduction with touch up work on the edges.
If the Minnesota tools were found in Morocco, there would be no debate.
What you have to ask yourself, is: "Would every bit of white cortex be removed from the Minnesota pieces, if they were natural?” And would natural banging around create flat tablets of flint, or would it create irregular, semi-spheres and random "scatter".
As to Scott checking other geologically similar spots, I think it's a good idea, but he needs to get far away enough from the original site, in case there are more tools from the same group of people (which there probably are).
Recovering some of these pieces in situ, around the same area Matt and Thor are digging, might be helpful, also, so he can see how they stand out compared to smoothed, natural cobbles.
In my case, I have found thousands of these tools, but I'm also dealing with a site that was a primary water resource, and thus a big attraction for people. I'm not familiar enough with the geology in Walker, Minnesota to know if the site in question was close to an old river or stream, or some other attraction.
I know in my case, the artifacts were indeed swept and consolidated into gravel terraces along with the natural gravels, sand and clay. I'm not sure about the Walker situation. Think you might be able to track down a description of the geology in the area? That would be very helpful for us to fully understand the situation in Walker.
