Archaeologica.org

Thanks for the translation/explanation, John.

Nuther rookie question:

How do we know that HE used boats?

Thanks.

It wasn't just at Sibubu that early humans were showing the innovation that today we take for granted.

Similar artefacts have been found in Morocco and at other archaeological sites in South Africa and Wadley believes these developments occurred independently of each other.

As to what triggered this change in early human behaviour, Wadley suggests that it might be up to academics in other scientific fields to answer that question.

"It might have been some sort of genetic mutation that made early people able to think in a modern way, but this suggestion needs to be followed up by someone other than an archaeologist," she said.

What sort of identical mutation occurs simultaneously in two groups thousands of miles apart I'd like to know.

Simple answer Ish, there was no other recourse open to them.

Roy.

Thanks.

As are spear points.

Remember news stories are written by non-experts for non-experts.
You have to write to the level of your audience.
Most people know what an arrow head is.
Not near as many would know what an "atatl point" was.

Er ... dare I ask, what's an atlatl point?

Ishtar wrote:Er ... dare I ask, what's an atlatl point?

Some info here http://www.ucalgary.ca/~walde/glossary.html

Ishtar wrote:Er ... dare I ask, what's an atlatl point?

Part of a boat.

Ishtar wrote:Thanks for the translation/explanation, John.

Nuther rookie question:

How do we know that HE used boats?

Thanks.

Ishtar -

Answer: There is no direct evidence, i.e. a fossil boat.

The oldest boat in the world is, at this point:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/704398/posts

Now we get into the Homo adothoap argument.

Homo adothoap stands for

Homo "angels dancing on the head of a pin" spp.

Its probably hellacious good for university tenure,

And the kind of cash that produces

But not so good for understanding.

Some people went from the mainland to Australia

50-60 k years ago.

They didn't swim there.

Whether they were Home e. or Homo s.

I couldn't care less: pedantic argument.

And the evidence is increasing that people

Were occupying continents Without Benefit of Land Bridges

Far earlier than Das Klub would suggest.

Now we have the Mexican site.

With no human remains, but projectile points

In situ

Say 200,000 to 80,000 years ago.

So, just for argument's sake,

I'll ask the question

"Just how did the Out of Africa diaspora

Of Homo e. arrive simultaneously in the Americas

As in Europe"

Then I'll ask

How did the use of Hematite show up everywhere at the

Same time (hello, Minimalist), with the exception

of Homo heidelbergensis and homo n.

Who used it far earlier?

And so, give me a plausible method by which

Early man could jump from continent to continent, island to

Island, without using boats?


hoka hey


john

I'm loyally with you on the boats, John.

I'll go further than island hopping or continent jumping. Some sort of boating technology would have been needed just to cross rivers. One could walk a long way looking for a ford across the Amazon or the Nile.

Being logical again Min river travel must have preceded sea travel I would think.

Roy.

Thank you.

I'm sure you must be right.

But my point was more why specifically HE.... ?

One of you said 'HE ... and that means boats'.

HS now goes back about 100,000 years, according to recent fossils findings.

So why specifically HE and boats?

Depends on the age and location Ish. HSS spread PDQ but not instantly, same with HE. In world wide terms they will have existed at the same time, if only in different locations, in fact late HEs may actually be early HSSs.
Before a given date in a given locale it can be stated with a degree of certainty that it would be HE and after a given date HSS, but time and distance from origin could cause confusion.
It's a bit like trying to put a date on the Bronze age for a given spot, it will vary from place to place.

Roy.

Ishtar wrote:Thank you.

I'm sure you must be right.

But my point was more why specifically HE.... ?

One of you said 'HE ... and that means boats'.

HS now goes back about 100,000 years, according to recent fossils findings.

So why specifically HE and boats?

Ishtar -

One of the things that regularly enrages me is the arrogant lie

Encapsuled in the scientific nomenclature of various Homo

Subspecies. Homo n., Homo e.; naaah, no hope of cognition there!

Only Homo sapiens is allowed that divinity.

And I'd imagine that - out of that lot -

Only the white, blondhaired, blueyed

Homo s. are really smart.

Yes?


hoka hey


john

I can't recall the location now John but I recall reading sometime ago that HE probably survived as a separate species longer in China than elsewhere and that the last of his kind had a brain capacity within HSS range and that he stood no less high than HSS and the Chinese could not say where HE ended and HSS began.
As HE shows a steady increase in brain size through the ages it suggests to me that they are one and the same species. The difference in brain size between the later HEs and HSS is a lot less than the the difference between the earlier HEs and their later compatriots apparently.

Roy.

A website I go to when I get bored had an article about brain size evolution...took me awhile but I found it.
About 3/4ths the way down

It is nothing short of spectacular that so many mutations in so many genes were acquired during the mere 20-25 million years of time in the evolutionary lineage leading to humans, according to Lahn. This means that selection has worked "extra-hard" during human evolution to create the powerful brain that exists in humans.

Varki points out that several major events in recent human evolution may reflect the action of strong selective forces, including the appearance of the genus Homo about 2 million years ago, a major expansion of the brain beginning about a half million years ago, and the appearance of anatomically modern humans about 150,000 years ago. "It's clear that human evolution did not occur in one fell swoop," he said, "which makes sense, given that the brain is such a complex organ."

sciencedaily.com