Problematic Discoveries

[Tiompan]

[“I am no expert on levellois technology, however, the fact that its use has been noted over a 500,000 year time span would suggest it served many occupations of people quite well. The persistence of its use into more "modern" times has been noted. “

Springhead ,
You don’t have to be an expert to realise it is a technique that has been in use for a long time ,and in the Americas and elsewhere comparatively recently . These more recent discoveries were not dated by use of the technique , but by the context and stratigraphy .

"This use does not preclude levallois technology having been used in deep antiquity, as evidenced in the great time span referenced, but rather confirms it as a precursor. "
It means it has been used for a long time ,in some cases more recently than in others .What is required is to determine when , not imagine it is an early example when there is no supporting evidence .

“ The fact that Rick's discoveries have been identified as levallois by expert analysis and the deep time patina found on these pieces together strongly mandate the idea of an American occupation using the technique many thousands or tens of thousands of years prior to accepted occupation dates on the continent.”

No it doesn’t . Even excluding from the non boilerplate disclaimer , it is fantasising . Do you think those who discovered the more recent examples thought that they had found anything as old as you might imagine . Look at Clovis blades they are pure levallois technology .

“Just because this is implausible to you does not make it incorrect or even far fetched. “
If it is implausible which it is , it is by it’s nature far fetched . If you claim that Ricks’s finds are thousands of years pre Clovis ,and you have no evidence to support that claim then the claim is in correct .

“ I would think the chances of the existence of an early American cultural use would be quite high with the lack of impediments to the population of the continent over glacial and interglacial time spans. “
You might think or believe so but there is no evidence to support the belief .And that is in a continent that has been seen as many excavation hours and searching as anywhere .

“There is only one thing on this planet we can absolutely count on, and that is change, to include the need for change of approach when confronted by uncomfortable realities. “ Maybe those that believe in all the evidence free fantasies will eventually face up to the uncomfortable reality that , evidence trumps belief , but I doubt it .

[uniface]

[quote]Look at Clovis blades they are pure levallois technology .[quote]

With this we have reached the outermost limit of imbicility.

[Tiompan]

Look at Clovis blades they are pure levallois technology .

With this we have reached the outermost limit of imbicility.

Tell that to those who know a bit about the subject , You obviously know nothing , as has been apparent from your first comments and subsequent nonsense . See p 52 of" Bipoints before Clovis ": Jack Hranicky, "Clovis blades are pure Levallois technology ".

Why do continually fail to provide anything to support your BS . All you seem capable of doing is stamping your foot and putting your fingers in your ears and squealing " that's wrong " or something a bit stronger than wrong , as if it makes the point clearer .Evidence is something that just passes you by .

[Springhead]

Tiompan,

Thank you again for commenting. That a levallois assemblage found in North America has no context and stratigraphy as supporting evidence does not make the claim of its existence untrue, it makes it unproven. The artifacts exist, have been analyzed by experts, and have demonstrated deep time patina indicating age well beyond the tight dating of the clovis assemblage. As I remember, the clovis culture is not well understood in the progression of the peopling of the Americas other than the tight time frame they are found in. Where the inspiration for their technology came from is not understood but does not in any way preclude the strong possibility of a levallois assemblage far more ancient.

Deep time patinas found on existing levallois assemblages is not a fantasy. Those who discovered younger levallois use in tool production were confronted with appropriately developed patinas for the dating as are folks confronting the significantly more aged patinas on the subject assemblages. Are the respective patinas of absolutely no significance as you appear to indicate?

"Evidence free fantasies" is a poor choice of words to describe an existing tool assemblage with deep time patina. I would propose that the fantasy is the idea that ancient hominids occupied nearly all of the planet except the Americas. As to the amount of excavation and inquiry in the Americas, the sheer size of the area suggests great gaps in understanding rendered from such activity. Also, and more importantly, the status quo has dictated the depths at which investigations are to be concerned with, and despite excavation over widespread areas, no one has been digging deep enough. They dug down at Topper, and lo and behold they find a cultural assemblage dating to 50,000 ybp! These finds resemble what I am finding on the surface at the mountain site. This calls for a geomorphologically better understanding of the mountain site, but nonetheless warrants comparative analysis with Topper finds.

So I suppose we must agree to disagree. If I thought my work and that of others such as Rick were fantasy, there would be no reason to move forward, but until someone can convince me that these found assemblages with very aged patinas are something other than what experts analyze them to be, I would be turning my back on an extraordinary opportunity to help carry forward work that could help to fill in a rather large early gap (as in empty space) in the understandings of American archaeology. George Carter was a smart guy and geomorphologist who authored "Older Than You Think." If you have trouble believing my non professional views, perhaps you should reference his work.

[Springhead]

[urlhttp://semioticon.com/sio/files/downloads/2011/03/bednarik2-1.pdf][/url]

Tiompan,

I thought this article might interest you in light of some of the elements of our discussion. Also, it intrigues me how you cite Jack Hranicky to support your opinions yet disregard Jack's opinions concerning the age of Rick Dononger's assemblage from Tennessee.

[circumspice]

Artifacts vs. geofacts

Mainstream archaeology scholars dismissed many of Carter's lithic artifacts to be geofacts, rocks that have a similar appearance to human-worked stone tools due to natural weathering processes. Carter's theories about the early peopling of the New World could have been influencing his observations. Because of Carter's tendency to exhibit questionable artifacts as data, some scholars began to call any dubious artifacts "cartifacts".[2]


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_F._Carter

[Tiompan]

Springhead ,

The various points (pun half intended ) about Levallois are common knowledge ,they are hardly contentious , it's only Uni around here who appears to be in the dark about them .

Rick's finds and their interpretation are an entirely different matter ,as are Jack's view on the Spout Run astronomy etc .

Ooops just noticed the Bednarik link , will check , but I think I may have read it .
usually very sensible in relation to rock art is RB .

[Springhead]

Circumspice,

Thank you for the comments on George Carter. Anyone claiming dating in the range Carter was suggesting will have been subjected to the hailstorm of criticism and skepticism that he was. The coining of the word "cartifact" is certainly exemplary of this. This attitude has been expounded upon by Robert Bednarik in the previously posted link to the paper he wrote. I do not have the expertise to evaluate Carter's theories other than saying they are plausible to me. The more focused criticism becomes for someone like him expressing theories of antiquity in North America not conforming to the status quo, the more skeptical I become with this criticism. The reactive sensitivity of powers that be is like one who probes an open wound, the howls of complaint ever louder as the fingers of questioning (the status quo) get ever closer to the point of contention.

As in advertising, create the problem, then solve it for the consumer, i.e. "ring around the collar." As with the label of fantast or victim of pareidolia, the implied demeaning in these semantics is key to the general derision of those who dare to opine alternate theories about rocks that are "obviously" geofacts. How many theories have been summarily dismissed with the two words....geofact and pareidolia? I have noted previously in this thread relative to my finds that I do not understand how Mother Nature paints a portrait on a rock as it falls from an escarpment on its certain trajectory to geofact status.

Calico is probably the most blatant example of a disinformation campaign to nullify work and theories that suggest a 200,000 ybp human presence in North America. Leakey must be rolling in his grave. The outright destruction of analyzed artifacts in this case is extreme. If Leakey were alive today, would his life be in danger?

This is not a personal attack on you, Circumspice, just comments relative to your relevant comment. Thanks for your thoughts on the subject.

[Tiompan]

Springhead ,
I couldn't get the Bednarik link to work .
Ttry agian please ?
Or let me know the titles , I might the have a copies .

[Springhead]

Tiompan,

Sorry the link didn't work. I pasted it directly from my address bar, so I don't what the problem is.

"Milestones of Pleistocene Archaeology" Robert Bednarik

If you don't have a copy it should be easy to find with a search.

[Tiompan]

Springhead ,
Got it .
Strange that you should pick one of his papers which tells of his personal experience in dealing with claims for Pleistocene art in the Coa valley, which he attempted to refute as he believed them to be much later i.e. Holocene and possibly even made with metal tools .

[circumspice]

Calico is probably the most blatant example of a disinformation campaign to nullify work and theories that suggest a 200,000 ybp human presence in North America. Leakey must be rolling in his grave. The outright destruction of analyzed artifacts in this case is extreme. If Leakey were alive today, would his life be in danger?

Springhead 99 19 Jan 2016, 06:50

Oh please... Now you add a martyr complex to the discussion? That is beyond belief.

[Tiompan]

“That a levallois assemblage found in North America has no context and stratigraphy as supporting evidence does not make the claim of its existence untrue, it makes it unproven. “

Springhead ,
Even if the putative assemblage is similar to Levallois technique , we can’t date it .
To suggest that it might date to early European or African Levallois is fantasy . There is nothing to support the presence of anyone in the areas in that period .

“Where the inspiration for their technology came from is not understood but does not in any way preclude the strong possibility of a levallois assemblage far more ancient.”
As Hranicky pointed out "Clovis blades are pure Levallois technology ". And has also been pointed out the technique is found in much more recent situations than Clovis . Simply finding something similar to Levallois does not date it .
The evidence free fantasy is when finds from north America are assumed to be contemporaneous and associated with Homo erectus or nenaderthal ,when there is nothing to support the date or the presence of either group in the Americas .

“They dug down at Topper, and lo and behold they find a cultural assemblage dating to 50,000 ybp! “
No they didn’t .Topper is hugely contentious .

“but nonetheless warrants comparative analysis with Topper finds.”
In which case only the believers will buy it .


“ George Carter was a smart guy and geomorphologist who authored "Older Than You Think." If you have trouble believing my non professional views, perhaps you should reference his work. “
No thanks , geomorphologists are no more likely to produce thee goods than anyone else ,and when they stray into areas outwith their expertise it can and did become embarrassing .He was another hyper diffusionist , again with no evidence except when he got the Bada tests and dates all wrong .

[circumspice]

Criticism of dating

Critics quickly refuted Bada's results. When using amino acid racemization to date bones, one must know the approximate temperature the bones were exposed to while buried. Additionally, the stratigraphy of the bones suggested dates around 10,000 years ago rather than 70,000.[2]

In December 1984, Bada came forward and retracted all the dates of bones gleaned from amino acid racemization. Newer methods of dating, such as accelerator mass spectrometry gave the same bones dates of less than 10,000 years.[2]

[Springhead]

Circumspice,

I was merely trying to emphasize how vitriolic the discussions/rejections can become with that tongue in cheek statement about Leakey, though stranger things have happened when careers are at stake. Sorry to have upset you.