Archaeologica.org

http://www.islandpacket.com/news/local/ ... 19106.html

More than 13,000 years ago, South Carolina was a wild kingdom alive with all sorts of beasts: saber-tooth tigers, beavers the size of Great Danes, camels, elephants and mastodons.

Until recently, these animals were believed to have vanished before the first Americans -- called the Clovis people -- arrived about 13,000 years ago from Asia via the Bering Sea land bridge.

That view may soon change.

An archaeological dig currently under way at the Topper Site in Allendale County is one of a handful of excavations across the country where evidence is being uncovered that could rewrite America's history.

Can't wait for something really substantial to come out of Topper so we can enjoy some terrific fireworks from the "establishment." Is there really any of them left, thought only the really old coots believed in Clovis First anymore.

Leona Conner wrote:Can't wait for something really substantial to come out of Topper so we can enjoy some terrific fireworks from the "establishment." Is there really any of them left, thought only the really old coots believed in Clovis First anymore.

Yes, good point, Leona.

Who are these old dinosaurs anyway, that are holding up the march of truth?

I think we should name and shame them!

Here's one.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1196832/posts

For more than a half century, they have also been recognized as the ancestors of contemporary present-day native Americans. Linguistic and genetic evidence — as it is preserved in the speech and DNA of American Indians — tends to support the theory.

"There are just too many well-dated Clovis sites and too little evidence of any earlier human presence to support another explanation," says Stuart Fiedel, an archaeologist with the Louis Berger Group in Washington.

Fiedel is an avowed member of what critics deride as "the Clovis-first police," professionals who insist that the case for earlier settlement of the Americas is built on a flimsy foundation in fact.

Fiedel says he doesn't question the age of the soils the South Carolina team has been excavating, but he is skeptical that the crudely chipped flakes and points — hand-made "microblades" to the archaeologists who see them as ancient tools — were fashioned by humans.

Stuart had a difficult childhood:

Thawing and freezing, huh?

Fiedel says he doesn't question the age of the soils the South Carolina team has been excavating, but he is skeptical that the crudely chipped flakes and points — hand-made "microblades" to the archaeologists who see them as ancient tools — were fashioned by humans.

So who does he think fashioned them, then? Martians?

Ahem....

"There are natural forces, like freezing and thawing, that can fracture rock too," says Michael Waters of the Center for the Study of the First Americans at Texas A&M University. "You have to applaud Al Goodyear for having the courage to dig below Clovis, but right now the jury is still out on whether these are tools or not."

Michael Walters then ... he's another one. Put him on the list.

I'm ready, Ish.

If you check back Ish you'll probably find someone mouthing the same platitudes about Clovis.
Some things never really change.

We have been through this excercise before, and at the cost of boring the audience to tears, here goes:

Percussion flaking is unique since the hammer strike sends impact ripples through the material, such as chert, etc, much like ripples on a pond. When a potential artifact is recovered it really isn't too difficult to tell whether natural forces or human forces were at work. For those who have been out in the field they will agree that somewhere between picking up 1,000 and 10,000 specimins you get a pretty good feel for what's what.

People like Al Goodyear don't deal in wishful thinking. When plucking a potential artifact out of the dirt he would be looking at context and all the parameters that tell him whether the object was human-made or not. In 100% of the cases of critisism that I have noticed, none of the critics have actually examined the artifacts. That is simply piss poor science borne of arrogance.

Goodyear's site simply represents an ongoing hypothesis that some sort of human was kicking around near the shore in the southeast US sometime around 50kya, making tools. Just because Stuart Fiedel cannot get off his ass in Washington DC), travel to the site and review the material first-hand while speaking with Goodyear doesn't mean the potential artifacts are sharp rocks. Yes, ice can split rocks. But ice does not leave percussion ripples. Some of the bifacial artifacts that I have retrieved at the 18-20,000bp level locally have more than a dozen percussion marks per side - ice my ass.

It's really easy to critisize and come up with objections to anything when someone else's discovery doesn't fit your pre-conceived paradigm. Those who employ the scientific method are supposed to keep an open mind while reviewing the evidence at hand. It's alright to say, "I don't know." Don't worry - people won't panic - they'll be curious instead.

Use some imagination, Stuart - it may improve your sex life!

Below is a bifacial multi-purpose tool taken from the 18-20,00bp level. It can be used as a scraper, a knife and a shaft straightener. It ain't no sharp rock.



Below is a small knife taken from the same layer. Hard to see in the picture but there are about a dozen pressure flakes on the edge of that hummer. It ain't just a sharp rock.



Below is a bifacial teardrop point with dozens of flakes per side (picture courtesy of Charlie Hatchett). It ain't just a sharp rock.



Below is a carved, bifacial broken pendant, yes pendant, taken from the same site. You tell me that the outer notch on each side was carved by ice on a piece of chacedony, Mohs hardness 7.0!

Obverse (sorry about the fuzzy pic but you get the idea):



Reverse (more sorry about the fuzzy pic):



Below is a big-ass handaxe with notches removed to fit a thumb and fingers for a better grip. Damn, I forgot ... there are no handaxes in North America!!!

That was obviously straight from the heart and thus couldn't have been explained more clearly.

Brilliant, Cogs! Thanks!

I like that! Artistic ice!

Cogs, thanks for finally explaining the difference in a way that a dork like me can understand. I have always been one of those that thought that after several thousand years of being in the elements it would be almost impossible to tell if a rock was just a rock that had been accidentally hit and looked like a tool or a tool that had been eroded and looked like a rock.

Guess I'll have to make a trip to the McClung Museum and take a really good look at their exhibits.