Archaeologica.org

One for RS here!
Hat, coat, exit!!

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20 ... Y01201.htm

Digit wrote:One for RS here!
Hat, coat, exit!!

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20 ... Y01201.htm

Not so fast, Roy! It only says the 700,000 BP dating was a crock. It doesn't give a new dating. So until that's in it just as easily could be a half million years older. Or younger...

You're fighting a rear guard action my friend.
Surrender!!

Roy.

Digit wrote:You're fighting a rear guard action my friend.
Surrender!!

Surrender what, Roy? I'm not saying they had no boats by, say 800,000 BP. They probably did. But who are 'they'? 'They' are late HEs. My position is that early HEs conquered the world. Including the Americas. On foot! Along coastlines very different from those of today. Between 2.0 and 1.0 million years BP.
I maintain that.

I know you do, and I seem to recall a number of times trying to get you to specify such land routes as from Asia or Africa to the Andaman Islands!

Roy.

Digit wrote:I know you do, and I seem to recall a number of times trying to get you to specify such land routes as from Asia or Africa to the Andaman Islands!

That is impossible on today's maps as geography and geology – especially coastlines and tectonic faults – looked a whole lot different between 2.0 and 1.0 million years BP than they do today. Don't forget the Andamans are situated bang on top of a very active subduction zone – as the past week painfully demonstrated. Areas like that change a lot. All the time!

But for your peace of mind: the original Andaman people (HE; who got there on foot) lived there in peace for at least almost a million years or more, before HSS showed up in the area (Malaysian and Thai mainland) and Toba blew. The remnants of those (both HE and HSS; i.o.w. hybrids) that survived Toba scarpered away, trekked on, boating when necessary, and eventually joined their brethren in Oz who had already walked there (passing the Andamans on their route; possibly not touching them as over time they had turned into islands separated by deep water from the mainland) hundreds of thousands years earkier. And together with later waves of HSS (who probably boated) they RE-hybridized into the Abos we westerners found in the 17th century.
So, imo, Abos are the closest living HE/HSS hybrids we still have today.

Firstly, we don't have evidence for them being HE, secondly we don't have evidence for tectonic movements having created a dry path, and genetics suggest they came from Africa not the much nearer Asia, nor do we have any evidence of hybridisation.
That's an awful lot of assumptions simply to support a walking hypothesis, and all the evidence is against you for a land bridge to Oz.
In fact you have yet to offer any evidence on any of those views, plus the fact that your walk to Oz fails to account for why man and his dog got there and Asiatic mammals didn't and why Oz marsupials didn't get the other way either.
May I suggest that it was 'cos they had no ark available!
Any theory that fails to address these points must fall.
Over to you RS.

Roy.

Digit wrote:Firstly, we don't have evidence for them being HE

If by "them" you mean the early HE Andaman colonizers then it's small wonder "we don't have evidence for them being HE", because they were destroyed by Toba, their remnants covered by a 13 meter thick ash layer in 72,000 BP. But we know HE was already on Java and near Beijing by 800,000 years BP (which was 728,000 years earlier).
If we want to find early HE Andaman colonizers we'll need to dig under those 13 meter thick ash layers.

secondly we don't have evidence for tectonic movements having created a dry path

I doubt if tectonic movements well over a million years ago that created a dry path can be proved or disproved at all. But it is an undeniable fact that that is about the most tectonically and volcanically active region on the face of the earth. As the past week painfully demonstrated...

and genetics suggest they came from Africa not the much nearer Asia

Yep, that figures: HE, straight from Africa. Along the coastlines.

nor do we have any evidence of hybridisation.

We will when we look for it: I suggest we start with a good, hard look at the Abos.

all the evidence is against you for a land bridge to Oz.

Seems you forgot this, Roy:

In fact you have yet to offer any evidence on any of those views

Have a look above...

plus the fact that your walk to Oz fails to account for why man and his dog got there and Asiatic mammals didn't and why Oz marsupials didn't get the other way either.

HE walked to Oz across the above "land" bridge: they may have had to wade. Not a big problem for a species that had made a living along waterlines for a million years. Large mammals from Asia and marsupials from Oz couldn't cross that. Dogs got to Oz much later. After Toba. With HSS (not HE!). By boat.

because they were destroyed by Toba,

And the remains are currently being recovered in a good state of preservation! So there!

Along the coastlines.

For which there is no evidence of course.

Seems you forgot this, Roy:

Nope! PNG was part of Oz till the end of the last GM, the Wallace line is north of there!

Large mammals from Asia and marsupials from Oz couldn't cross that.

Asiatic Elephants seem to managed pretty well on the rest of the island chain, so why not Oz?
So your argument runs thus, man didn't have boats so he must have walked to Oz, therefore there must have been a land bridge, therefore he didn't need a boat!
I'll give you another example of circular thinking.
If God had meant us to fly he would have given us wings, as we don't have wings it was never intended that we should fly!

Roy.

it was never intended that we should fly!

Rats...then how did I get back and forth to South Carolina?

Walk?

Roy.

Digit wrote:

because they were destroyed by Toba,

And the remains are currently being recovered in a good state of preservation! So there!

That would be nice. Currently, you say? Can you show me something that supports that? I've been wanting them to dig through those enormous ash layers for decades. You say they are doing that now? And when are they going to do the same on Sumatra?

Along the coastlines.

For which there is no evidence of course.

There isn't? How about Australopithecines living on the south-African coast (I forget where now) of off seafood long before HE even existed? Even Min's red ochre was found there in caves on the coast (which, a great exception, is still as near the waterline as it was 4 million years ago!).

Seems you forgot this, Roy:

Digit wrote:Nope! PNG was part of Oz till the end of the last GM, the Wallace line is north of there!

Tectonics, Roy.

Large mammals from Asia and marsupials from Oz couldn't cross that.

Digit wrote:Asiatic Elephants seem to managed pretty well on the rest of the island chain, so why not Oz?

No, they didn't "manage pretty well on the rest of the island chain": no elephants on islands east of Bali in living memory.
I'm guessing they were hunted to extinction there – they were trapped and couldn't run from islands – along with all the other mega fauna. And because they were trapped that probably happened long before the mega fauna extinctions of Eurasia and the Americas. Like hundreds of thousands of years earlier!

So your argument runs thus, man didn't have boats so he must have walked to Oz, therefore there must have been a land bridge, therefore he didn't need a boat!

No, Roy. That is not my argument. Maybe you'll allow me to phrase my argument myself...?

Hominids (Australopithecines before HE, in south Africa) learned to live and migrate along coastlines, specifically waterlines, because that's where protein rich food was in abundance, all year round: mussels, barnacles, oysters, crabs, shrimp, cephalopods, little fish. Thousands of (sea) bird eggs. And lots of fruits and berries if you walk mere hundreds of meters (1 meter = 1,1 yard) inland. So along the waterline was where the gathering of that protein rich food was easiest, with the least physical risks. So that all members of a group could participate in gathering it. Not just the males in their prime, but also the females, the offspring, and the elderly. All ages, all sexes. That was a magnitude more efficient mechanism for food generation than depending on inland game hunting by only a tiny number of the mouths it needed to sustain: the males in their prime.
HE, their successor, discovered another aspect of coastlines/waterlines: you can cover great distances along them with relatively little obstructions! I.o.w. the going along waterlines was easier and safer than going cross-country, where predators lurked behind, and in, every tree and rock! So HE took the concept a step further: he left Africa, and conquered the entire world*. On foot! All along the coastlines. THE COASTLINES OF THAT ERA! That's between 4,5 and 1 million years BP. After a few million years of tectonics, volcanism, and ice ages, with consequently varying sea levels, those coastlines are today under 400 feet of seawater. Generally speaking the coastline then was on the edge of the continental plane today. Miles, if not hundreds of miles, from today's coastlines. Faaar out to sea. So if there's any evidence left to be found, that's where it is. Faaar out to sea, in 400 feet of seawater.
Looking on today's landmass, even coasts, for remnants of HE is therefore a nearly futile exercise, borne out by the extremely rare finds there: that jives with HE very rarely living inland.

* including the Americas and Oz since HE could walk there, THEN, along coastlines.
Later, sea levels rose, drowning land, creating islands, forcing HE to find another way to keep moving along meanwhile interrupted coastlines. And as necessity is the mother of invention, that is when and why HE developed boating. As it stands it looks like like that was maybe up to a million years BP.
Not long after that, relatively speaking, we see the emergence of all sorts of contentious homo species. Variants (often 'regionalized') on the HE theme, imo. Like Homo Ergaster, Homo Heidelbergensis, Homo Neanderthalensis, etc. Suggesting relative regional isolation: by seawater! Risen sea levels! Because although HE may have developed boating up to a million years BP, he didn't develop high-volume, high-frequency ferry systems. He left that up to us, HSS, in the last few millennia.

So my position is that HE did not have boats when he conquered the world. He did that on foot! Between 2.0 and 1.0 million years BP. Because he could: sea levels were 400 feet lower than today. HE developed boats only late, around 1.0 million years BP or later, and after he had already conquered the world on foot! Because his world changed: sea levels rose and tectonics moved. Radically morphing coastlines. So HE needed boats to cross 'new' coastline interruptions. A situation that had not existed in the previous million years. Which was the era in which HE walked along all continents' coastlines.

Digit wrote:Walk?

Roy.

I'm far too lazy for that.

Can you show me something that supports that?

Yeah! Watch British TV!

And when are they going to do the same on Sumatra?

Ask the Sumatrans.

There isn't?

That wasn't the point, it was proof that they walked along coastlines that you never established existed, as per to the Andamans.

Tectonics, Roy.

Evidense RS?

No, they didn't "manage pretty well on the rest of the island chain": no elephants on islands east of Bali in living memory.

They reached evrywhere a man could wade!!

I accept every part of you argument but would point out the same argument equally supports boats!
In fact one point of your argument that might be questionable is when man reaches river estuary, his previously easy progress is no longer so easy on foot, but much easier by boat.
Nothing in your argument mitigates against boats whereas river mouths suports boats and would in fact, within your scenario, be a damn good reason for those early migrants to develop such craft.
So in summerising, your argument does not hold water!

Roy.

Digit wrote:

Tectonics, Roy.

Digit wrote:Evidense RS?

The entire past week's nine o'clock news, Roy...

No, [Asiatic elephants] didn't "manage pretty well on the rest of the island chain": no elephants on islands east of Bali in living memory.

Digit wrote:They reached evrywhere a man could wade!!

No, Roy: man got to all the islands east of Bali, and Oz as well. And survived until this day. Elephants didn't. So either they never even got there, or, if they did, they disappeared again when their habitats changed into islands from which they could not escape anymore so that man could hunt 'm down.

Digit wrote:when man reaches river estuary, his previously easy progress is no longer so easy on foot, but much easier by boat.

That is very dependent on the estuary in question, Roy. Estuaries are all different. Very different. Most can be waded through. Especially at low tide (FYI: my whole country is an estuary...).
But you're right in that estuaries that could not be waded through presented a problem and could therefore well have been where the concept of a floating device saw first light.
There is, however, a world of difference between floating/paddling across a shallow estuary arm to the other bank (a distance of a couple dozen to max. a few hundred meters/yards; all within excellent sight) and setting off across the high seas to a totally unknown and invisible destination. There is no comparison.
There is also a world of difference between a floating device that gets you to the other bank and a real, steerable boat, capable of crossing the high seas. Again: there is no comparison.