Page 11 of 12
Sahul
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 12:40 pm
by Cognito
I blame Cogs, leading me on there.
Sorry Ish ... I thought you were aware of the previous discussions along this line. That's what I get for thinking. However, I do appreciate blonde and gullible.
Deep water channels required boats or rafts to make it to Australia. Here is a better representation of land exposed at the LGM.
Along the way it has been shown that
H. erectus made it to the island of Flores circa 800kya which required a deep channel crossing. If that could be done, don't be surprised if very old hominid fossils are found in Australia or New Guinea sometime in the near or distant future.
Re: Sahul
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 12:42 pm
by Ishtar
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 12:46 pm
by Beagle
Thank you, Dig. I will remember that....but then, how did the kangaroos get there?
The kangaroo, and all marsupial species of Australia, were present in Gondwanaland, an early landmass. After separation, these animals did not complete the evolutionary process to full mammalization.
It's mostly a primitive rodent.
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 12:55 pm
by Digit
Sod you Beag! You stopped me airing my knowledge!

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 12:58 pm
by Beagle
I'm sorry Dig. I'll step aside. I'm sure there will be plenty of opportunity.
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 1:04 pm
by Beagle
BTW - what does "sod you" mean? Am I cursed?

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 1:09 pm
by Digit
Mild English expletive Beag, not insulting between friends.
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 1:25 pm
by Beagle
I like British phrases, one day I need to get a book though.
Anyway, we know that the kangaroo is a primitive giant rat. Your version would have been better, no doubt.
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 1:44 pm
by Digit
No! Just a suggestion for Min to produce an image of a suitable Rat trap!

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 2:03 pm
by Ishtar
Thank you, Beags and Dig.
I didn't want to blow your topic off course. Of course, it's not my area of expertise. It's just that you were talking about boats anyway .... and Rich has been on at me to find an old shamanic boat in the cave art and so on. So I'm wondering how old does it have to be for you to find it interesting? I can't seem to get an answer to that question ...yet.

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 2:10 pm
by Beagle
I didn't want to blow your topic off course.
This thread hasn't had a topic in a long time.
To most of us, an old boat will at least be Pleistocene in age. Prior to 10,000 BC.
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 2:11 pm
by Digit
Boats today Ish have science behind them, and like modern cars, are all begiining to look the same.
Any age helps show the development of water craft.
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 3:14 pm
by kbs2244
I remember, a long time ago when I watched TV, a Nova type program when they showed from an under water point of view, elephant drivers taking their rides from one island to another.
In short, they can swim. And quite well.
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 5:00 pm
by Minimalist
They're in the bunker.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 10:04 am
by War Arrow
Did Michelle or someone move all the Aus stuff to New World then?