Footprints In Mexico

gunny · Post by **gunny** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:46 am

A while back very old footprints were seen in Mexico. A new set discovered. Any ideas?

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:05 am

Gunny, I'm not quoting anything here but I'm sure the "40,000 yr. old footprints" did not pass muster. They are of recent origin. The newest find that you're referring to is tentatively dated to around 12,500 ya I think. That's well within the known human occupation of the Americas.

There's a lot going on elsewhere though.

gunny · Post by **gunny** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:31 am

Thanks for the response--Thought there was a datable volcanic ash in the 40K, or older, prints.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:33 am

That's what I thought too Gunny. I can't remember the particulars but I'm sure I could find it and post it later.

Cognito · Post by **Cognito** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:49 am

Redating the ash where the impressions were made came back as 1.3 million years old and rained on the Mexican parade:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4488490.stm

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:54 am

Hmmm.....well there it is. I think I'll mentally put that on a shelf and wait for more information.

And I'm still wondering how the New World monkeys got here.

gunny · Post by **gunny** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:08 pm

Damn---still convinced there were the early homos here---or at least--pre-Columbians with swords and AAA maps.

Starflower · Post by **Starflower** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:15 pm

But the ash has now been dated to 1.3 million years ago - more than a million years before modern humans evolved.

Relatives of our species living at this time were not capable of making the journey to the Americas, experts say.

I would like to meet the people who lived back then so feel they can make these types of 'factual' statements. Or maybe I could borrow their time machine and see for myself.

Sorry but IMO a theory is still a theory till you show me different.

Anyone seen this article?

The British-Mexican team plan to publish their supporting evidence for the footprints in the academic journal Quaternary Science Reviews in January.

They are currently preparing an official reply to the study in Nature.

Sounds like there will be more more cross and jostle work in the future.

Cognito · Post by **Cognito** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:24 pm

Damn---still convinced there were the early homos here---or at least--pre-Columbians with swords and AAA maps.

Well, we have had homos here in California for a long time, does that count?

gunny · Post by **gunny** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:49 pm

The Peoples Republic Of Commefornia does not count. They do have some interesting near coast islands.

Post by **Minimalist** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:54 pm

Although some scientists have conceded it is possible that archaic humans such as Homo erectus could have made it to the Americas, the possibility is considered remote in the extreme.

But...perhaps they left "footprints?"

gunny · Post by **gunny** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:59 pm

TOUCHE----Minimalist-----Touche

Cognito · Post by **Cognito** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:16 pm

But...perhaps they left "footprints?"

Maybe they left more than footprints:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3715132.stm

It is difficult for me to fathom how one group of H. sapiens living in Asia could be infected with head lice from H. erectus, and then voyage to the Americas without leaving other infected people behind. Can someone help me out here?

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:16 pm

the headlice had the boats

not the homos

Cognito · Post by **Cognito** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:24 pm

the headlice had the boats. not the homos

Ah yes, that explains it. Seafaring headlice who can make the Pacific transition within 24 hours. Hokey Smoke! I'll have to hop into Mr. Peabody's WAYBACK machine to take a look at that one. It's more exciting than a Flea Circus!

Archaeologica.org

Footprints In Mexico

Footprints In Mexico

Footprints

Homos

Lice

Headlice