Archaeologica.org

http://www.athenapub.com/10pfurad.htm

Pedra Furada in northeastern Brazil represents possibly the oldest known human site in the Americas. Since C-14 dates of 48-32,000 BP were reported in a Nature article (Guidon and Delibrias 1986), the site’s Paleoindian components have been highly controversial, challenged (though not refuted) by many North American researchers (e.g. Meltzer, Adovasio, and Dillehay 1994). Yet the site has solid evidence of non-Clovis, Paleoindian occupations including human remains, plus a unique rock painting tradition from at least 12,000-6,000 BP.

This site in Brazil is now in a National Park. This is another site that is finding very early evidence of humans in the Americas. Some dates are extreme - 48,000 yrs plus BP. Like Topper, it is located up river from the ocean.

http://www.andaman.org/BOOK/chapter54/t ... Furada.htm

More on Pedra Furada - with pics and maps.

Like Topper, it is located up river from the ocean.

Within paddling distance, I'm sure!

The archaeological establishment (and not just in the Americas) is - how can one put this tactfully? - not exclusively peopled by specialists dedicated to the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Amen to that.

But, on the Atlantic side, and well inland.
These were not “sea people.” following a “kelp highway.”
And check your globe.
This is a long, long way from the Topper site.
And there are a whole bunch of nice places to live in between.

But, on the Atlantic side, and well inland.

BINGO, kb.


Now, who wants to lay odds that they paddled around Chile and up the Atlantic Coast.....or, walked over the Andes through the rain forest, crossed the Amazon and got to this locale?

Both seem hazardous but the boat trip seems infinitely more doable.

kbs2244 wrote:But, on the Atlantic side, and well inland.
These were not “sea people.” following a “kelp highway.”
And check your globe.
This is a long, long way from the Topper site.
And there are a whole bunch of nice places to live in between.

There are some very favorable currents for migration in the far southern oceans - to three continents!

http://the-arc.wikispaces.com/Migration

Wait a second: I recall reading that the Amazon river's flow direction was exactly the other way around, long ago.
Question is, how long ago? And did that influence man's travels and tribulations, or are we talking millions of years here?

Either way....a portage over the Andes seems out of the question.

Well, there is an Equatorial current that goes basically from the Congo River to the Amazon River. But that is a pretty long open water ride.
If they came from Africa I would expect both launching and landfall to be a bit more North.
If they came from NA, from the Topper area, I would expect we would be finding sites in between. Either in the Islands or the Mexico/Central America route.
Same thing if they rounded the tip and came from the South.
(That would be a real trip! Columbia to Suriname the long way.)
The trouble with a West Coast origin is there is no easy way across the Andes anywhere on the continent.
And the weather around Cape Horn has never been very nice.
(That may not be true. There are forests in Antarctica aren’t there.)
This site is North of the Amazon on a relatively small river. It doesn’t go very far inland. So it’s being a down hill route is doubtful.
And this site, like Topper, is well upstream.
These were not sea based people. They were land HG.
No boats in the rock art that I saw.
Where was the mouth of these rivers that long ago?
There may well have been a “trading post” there to interact with the landlubbers and the sailors.
And maybe those, and the in between sites, are now under water?
I saw the tooth work that says the were HS, but has any genetic work been done to try and determine origin?

Wow, there's enough stuff here to keep my mind going for a long long time. I'm surprised that Adovasio and Dillehay are rising questions, considering what they've been through with their own excavations.

Bet we can come up with as many different ways of them getting there as we have people registered to this site.

All -

Hmmmm......

We have Very Old Arrowheads.

We have Very Old Beads.

We have Very Old Footprints in Volcanic Ash.

We have Topper.

We have Very Old - and sophisticated - Fabrics from the Windover Site.

We have Very Old Shoes.

We have Very Old Shell Middens in Baja.

Just to mention a few.

Nevermind Boats, or Hematite, of course!

It would seem that the general weight of evidence

For sophisticated human cognition

Creating a sophisticated and effective techne

Has just been kicked back about 40k years,

Across all continents.

Accompanied by an equivalent space-time

Sensibility otherwise known as the Shamanic.

So, to cut to the chase,

GW Bush is clearly a direct descendant of Noah,

And still running the same God, Incorporated, line.

As my 89 year old mother would say,

"Leave him lay where Jesus flang him."

Along with Das Klub.

With malice aforethought.



hoka hey


john

kbs2244 wrote:[...] And the weather around Cape Horn has never been very nice.
(That may not be true.

Indeed: it isn't. The permanent howling storm winds around Cape Horn are an urban legend. Most days of the year Drake Passage – the strait between Tierra del Fuego and the Antarctic peninsula – is almost as flat as a mirror (an undulating mirror, to be precise). Sailors therefore often jokingly refer to it as 'Drake Lake'. I can confirm the appropriateness of that nomenclature from personal experience.

[...] There are forests in Antarctica aren’t there.)

Where ever did you hear that? There are no trees, or even bushes, on Antarctica. None! It's a barren rock plateau with 1 to 3 miles of ice and snow covering it. No forests, no trees, no green foliage of any kind. Mosses and lichens on sun-facing rock faces (where snow cannot lie because it's vertical) are the only flora on land. But you'll have to search good to find them. They are rare occurrences.
I checked this myself too.

However, 20,000, 40,000, or 60,000 years ago the climate in Antarctica most probably was very different. If it wasn't Piri Reis' map would have been impossible.

The permanent howling storm winds around Cape Horn are an urban legend.

Even if there was bad weather I doubt that a group travelling along the coast would put to sea in it. They'd take shelter on land and, if they had to move, would march along the beach until the sea calmed enough for them to take to the boats again. A howling wind and rough seas are dangerous to boats now. That should have been fairly obvious to them as well.

Minimalist wrote:They'd take shelter on land and, if they had to move, would march along the beach

What beach? Looked at a map of southern Chili? That's a thousand miles of fiordes. With steep cliffs rising straight out of the Pacific Ocean. There are no beaches. You cannot walk along the sea to Cape Horn. Maybe the Monte Verde folks were trying. Maybe Monte Verde was as far as they got. No nice level beaches to walk on. In fact the Monte Verde people had 3 possible choices: stay, go inland, or take to the sea. But they could't get to Cape Horn along the sea.