Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:36 pm
Just read "Fantastic" Schwartzenegger biography. Speaking of California---If he had tried some of his girl groping in Texas, he would have been shipped back to Austria in four boxes.
Your source on the web for daily archaeology news!
https://archaeologica.org/forum/
Don't worry yet Gunny. Check out Hueyatlaco, Topper, and Calico sites for starters. Pretty neat stuff going on. It will take awhile though.gunny wrote:Damn---still convinced there were the early homos here---or at least--pre-Columbians with swords and AAA maps.
Because head lice are unable to survive more than a few hours or days away from a human, their evolutionary history is tied in very closely to that of their hosts.
"There must have been some contact between archaic humans and modern humans in Asia. The modern humans then moved into the New World via Beringia (an ancient land bridge between Siberia and Alaska)," said Dr Smith.
Proves Homo Neananderthalis only reached the Americas in the 20th century ......gunny wrote:Just read "Fantastic" Schwartzenegger biography. Speaking of California---If he had tried some of his girl groping in Texas, he would have been shipped back to Austria in four boxes.
H. neanderthal never made it to the Orient. Caucasus area is about as far east as any remains have been found, Israel and Iraq about as far south. They don't seem to have wandered as much as H. erectus for some reason. I think Andy is right, different skill set. Well, except for the Neanderthal in Sacramento!Yeah, it's a far stretch to think that Neandertal got to the Americas.
Definitely worth looking into a bit more:Unless Erectus got here first, by boat, and walked around in the mud in Mexico for a while!
Not at all, Beag.BTW - I noticed an article you posted on Daves' website about VSM. You mind if I post it here later?
For example, H. erectus made hand-axes in more or less the same way for a million years, and examples have been found throughout the Old World.
Certainly plausible, Bro. Should have some preliminary U/Th dating results from Jim Bischoff (USGS) in a couple of weeks. That should give us a solid, general time frame within which to work. Thing about these gravels, Min, is we know their at least 11,500 B.P, but, from there, they could be all sorts of ages, because, most likely, they were deposited by a very, very heavy rain event, or by glacial activity, over a relatively short period of time. Included in those accumulated gravels are the artifacts, also washed or forced into the creek valley over that short period of time...And, perhaps the New World, eh Charlie?