Ancient rise in Sea Levels...

originally posted by: punkinworks10

The Lapita populated all of oceana and remote oceana, and well into western polynesia.

Not all of Oceania.
There is no record of Lapita Pottery in New Zealand.
The closest, however, is in New Caledonia.
I remember talking with someone about why this was so, but damnit, I can't, for the life of me, remember.



Excellent thread, Slayer.

Speaking of ancient sailing and boats....

Anybody remember this one...


Neanderthals May Have Sailed to Crete

Neanderthals, or even older Homo erectus("Upright Man") might have sailed around the Mediterranean, stopping at islands such as Crete and Cyprus, new evidence suggests. The evidence suggests that these hominid species had considerable seafaring and cognitive skills.

"They had to have had boats of some sort; unlikely they swam," said Alan Simmons, lead author of a study about the find in this week's Science. "Many of the islands had no land-bridges, thus they must have had the cognitive ability to both build boats and know how to navigate them."

Faces of our Ancestors

Simmons, a professor of anthropology at the University of Nevada, added that there is no direct evidence for boats dating back to over 100,000 years ago. If they were built then, the wood or other natural materials likely eroded. Instead, other clues hint that modern humans may not have been the first to set foot on Mediterranean islands.

On Crete, for example, tools such as quartz hand-axes, picks and cleavers are associated with deposits that may date to 170,000 years ago. Previously, this island, as well as Cyprus, was thought to have first been colonized about 9,000 years ago by late Neolithic agriculturalists with domesticated resources.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Bilk22

I suspect that boat building is a bit more than floating a log jam.

Crafting a device intended to carry passengers across the water. When did that first happen?

Neandertals were sea faring.....

That wasn't exactly the question now, was it? And yes, a log with one or more would certainly qualify, but a hollowed out log or a few joined together would better qualify as a boat.

One has to wonder how, in over thousands of years of history, Man was a primitive soldier , using sticks and stones, and then in a few relatively short years, he's flying through space. Something just doesn't seem acceptable about that conundrum.

Have any thoughts on that?

a reply to: Bilk22

I chalk it up to Moore's Law



In short: exponential growth in opportunity for improvement (population) will yield exponential growth in actual improvement.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Bilk22

I chalk it up to Moore's Law

In short: exponential growth in opportunity for improvement (population) will yield exponential growth in actual improvement.

Care to plot that out for - how many years of known history? That graph would look rather silly.

a reply to: Bilk22

Well of course it would. It was a graph meant to give you the concept of exponential growth, and the current law of how technology advances.

Since neither of us has any hard data to back any proposed explanations, we are left with conjecture.

originally posted by: Bilk22
That wasn't exactly the question now, was it? And yes, a log with one or more would certainly qualify, but a hollowed out log or a few joined together would better qualify as a boat.

I've got to respectfully disagree that just a random floating log qualifies as building a boat. I can see how it would serve as inspiration for lashing together several in order to create a raft but in and of itself it hardly qualifies as a boat let alone a built boat. Some of the examples I gave earlier which indicate H. Erectus was building crafts capable of traversing roughly 150 miles of open sea at least 500KYA. That's not something you're going to be able to do on a floating log.

One has to wonder how, in over thousands of years of history, Man was a primitive soldier , using sticks and stones, and then in a few relatively short years, he's flying through space. Something just doesn't seem acceptable about that conundrum.

Have any thoughts on that?

I don't know that you're giving our ancestors enough credit. The Antikythera Mechanism, Hero of Alexandria invented a steam engine nearly 2000 years ago, he created automatons, the first coin operated mechanism and Leonardo DaVinci invented scores of amazing contraptions. Egyptian and Roman engineering were light years ahead of their time. Pyramids, aqueducts, roadways and on and on. Those are just a couple of examples. If you want to get into warfare, there are tons of different advancements in metallurgy and smithing as well as engineering related to Greek and Roman war efforts. Again, while just a couple of examples, there were many more throughout the ancient world. There's no doubt that the industrial revolution kickstarted a massive increase in creativity and productivity on a scale unprecedented in human history, it wasn't the first time that humanity got creative or industrious with its ability to invent new and previously unseen things.

a reply to: SLAYER69


I was going to make a very similar thread recently, just been compiling more information.

Massive human cities are almost always on the coastlines, so it seems likely that 90% of the most significant history of humankind is probably sitting on the seafloor in 400-1000feet of water.

Look into the history of Doggerland, it's really interesting reading. Not so long ago, the Thames and the Rhine actually met where the English chanel sits today, and they flowed WEST, out to the Atlantic many miles west of the coast of present-day Brittany, France.

The only thing separating Norway from Scotland was the Norwegian trench, and you could WALK from Denmark to Scotland because the North Sea didn't even exist:



It's also likely that the Norwegian trench was covered by an ice sheet at one time, so many of the rivers would have actually fed into a massive freshwater lake. A few surveys have shown that this lake eventually eroded through a massive chalk mountain ridge that spanned from Dover to Calais and caused a huge outburst flood which literally carved the English chanel in a very short period of time. Wikipedia

The last remaining part of Doggerland was submerged by a huge Tsunami from the Storegga submarine lanslide in Norway.

www.q-mag.org...



I personally believe our entire "history" of humanity is maybe .1% correct. Hell, 99% of the places people actually lived a half-million years ago are sitting on seafloors. Even the out-of-Africa theory needs to be totally re-thought, considering it says humans didn't leave Africa until maybe 250,000BC, yet we recently found numerous fossil records dating over 1million years old well outside of Africa. Even young Britain has 900,000year old footprints.



.

originally posted by: 8675309jenny



I personally believe our entire "history" of humanity is maybe .1% correct. Hell, 99% of the places people actually lived a half-million years ago are sitting on seafloors.

Not entirely true.I think it's safe to say the number you attribute(99% of the places people lived) is a tad exaggerated unless
You have a citation showing otherwise It also depends on what exactly you want to define "people" as. Do you mean any member
Of the genus Homo, anatomically modern humans or H. Sapiens Sapiens?

Even the out-of-Africa theory needs to be totally re-thought, considering it says humans didn't leave Africa until maybe 250,000BC,

Actually it says AMH did not leave Africa until 80-100 KYA. Again, "people" can be a rather broad generalization as a descriptor and could be used for any number of members of our genus. Anatomically Modern Humans didn't exist until ~200 KYA with the oldest remains Having been found in Ethiopia and dated to ~ 195 KYA. The earlier hominids who left Africa were H. Erectus.

yet we recently found numerous fossil records dating over 1million years old well outside of Africa. Even young Britain has 900,000year old footprints. And Doggerland itself was inhabited around 400,000years ago.

The million year old fossils recently studied are of Homo Georgicus, a European variation of H. Erectus. The 900 KYA footprints were made by H. Antecesor who were a precursor to H. Heidelbergensis and Neanderthal. Not a direct ancestor of ours. Doggerland didn't exist 400KYA. At
That point sea levels were only ~5-10m lower than they currently are compared the 100m lower during the last glacial maximum. If anyone was living in the vicinity or during the periods of glaciation that would have exposed land, it would have been H. Heidelbergensis at 500KYA.

Another excellent thread by Slayer. I remain firmly convinced that important future discoveries will be driven precisely by inquisitive thinking such as this. (Indeed, I think they already *have*.)

Didn't just post to be chapping my lips here though! I actually do have a little substance...

While "boats" are going to be pretty debatable, "rafts" are perhaps more pertinent to the conversation.

Consider the fact that we have confirmed Denisovan remains in Siberia, and remaining genetic descendants in (almost exclusively) Melanesia. Even at glacial minimum, sea level would not have allowed bridging between Sundaland and Sahul. There is apparently a near-complete faunal separation at 'Wallace's Line', which passes just to the south of the Sunda 'mainland' coast (S/SE of current Java & Borneo). This is why you don't see kangaroos, wombats, and platypi elsewhere, as they simply couldn't make it across the sea to anywhere else.

...Denisovans made it there though, one way or another. Looks like perhaps the 'hobbits' were an HE-descendant archaic regional population, but the Denis came 'down' from SE Asia proper into the area. I've read lots of papers on the subject - the pathing seems fairly clear, but nobody seems to want to assign dates just yet. There would seem to have been some uncertainty whether Denis were in Melanesia and bred with aboriginal HS' upon their (the HS') arrival, or whether Denis encountered HS on the mainland, interbred, and their descendants crossed the line. (Note: probability greatly favors the former, genetically speaking as currently understood.)

I would think, considering current estimated time frames, that it's not implausible the Hobbits were archaic HE from the initial outmigration. Next migration by Deni to Sunda somewhere in the neighborhood of ~75KYA (?). This seems rather suspiciously close to Toba, considering time frame uncertainties and overall world wackiness in that era. Next, you got aboriginal HS somewhere around ~60KYA, with a somewhat more HSS-ish population by around ~-40KYA.



I'm sure we'll all learn more about these guys as time goes on. Seeing as, less than a decade ago, we had no flipping clue as to the mere existence of either Hobbits or Denis (much less this outside party 'menage-a-quatre' DNA they're referring to now!), there's lots more out there to learn surely.

Although I've digressed a bit, the point I was driving is that the first seeleute were likely Homo sapien unspecific (definitely pre-HSS...), and more akin to island hoppers, on something I would imagine looked a lot like this:



A few families traveling together get swept up in a storm and voila! You've got yourself a new founder population wherever they land. Island chains would have been much more prominent as well, improving sighting and stopping point availability on the way to lots of places.

I can't help but wonder if the multi-HS population of these areas don't feed into some of the ancient stories of Hanuman and some of the related animal-people, being so relatively closeby. I think a lot of these old 'other people' legends may actually be a faint remembrance of some of these populations.

Any way you slice it, Sundaland was quite the happening place for humanity from about 50KYA to 20 KYA. No less than 3, and possibly more, hominids of various descent all in the same general geographical area. Damn shame 99.9% of everything from that period is either underwater or eaten up by jungle. Would have liked to have been the proverbial fly on those cave walls.

originally posted by: peter vlar

Doggerland didn't exist 400KYA. At
That point sea levels were only ~5-10m lower than they currently are compared the 100m lower during the last glacial maximum. If anyone was living in the vicinity or during the periods of glaciation that would have exposed land, it would have been H. Heidelbergensis at 500KYA.

Yea, I was going from memory and 400,000 was definitely not the right period. Although even the current Dogger bank is only in about 10-15m of water, and was higher elevation a long time ago before the Tsunami.

Funny, when I edited that out there were no replies, we must have posted in overlap.

a reply to: Q

The Hobbits and Deni...


Years back when I first read about the discovery of Deni DNA showing up in the Melanesian bloodline I knew we had a game changer, I too wondered if Toba cleared the board so to speak of other HE lines spread out across the globe and later HS lines post Toba, interbred with the other HE 'Remanent' survivors on the Islands or SE Asia?

If those older ancient HE lines did explore and spread out across the Pacific then later interbred with later 'Out of Africa' waves of HS, it would explain how the later "Explorers/Seafarers' knew of this or that island/location hundreds or thousands of miles over the horizon simply because of stories were passed down by word of mouth generation to generation.

Consequently, when later known historic or even recent prehistoric HS seafarers sailed the Pacific they knew of their destination beforehand.

a reply to: peter vlar

Hi Peter,

Totally correct, i mad a big boo boo


For some reason, i keep replacing East Timor with Papua New Guinea (not the first time i have done that!). I must have sub conscious prejudices against East Timor! Not the only clanger i dropped yestersday either......must be suffering brain rot......

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: mikegrouchy

unfortunately, the very nature of underwater archaeology is extremely cost and time prohibitive which is why we see so little of it. its a lot easier to walk around on land and survey a site than it is to do so underwater. Advances in radar, sonar and satellite tech are beginning to bridge the gap a little bit but its a very labor intensive and costly undertaking. Particularly when looking at paleolithic sites for example verses the recent Egyptian finds underwater. Unfortunately people get way more excited to go to a museum and see some cool looking AE artifacts that have been underwater for a couple thousand years as opposed to the scientific benefits of locating and exploring paleolithic sites that would give us greater insight into past migrations and habitats so that's where the money will almost always go. The bang for your buck always wins out sadly.

Totally correct. One other thing to consider is location. For example, one of the most exciting areas for under water archeology would be the Black Sea (submerged settlements, etc) but excavation would be extremely difficult because of, amongst many other factors, the salinity of the water. When mixed with thousands of years of post glacial melt off from the steppes and you have a mix that is very corrosive, making excavation hughly dangerous.

originally posted by: SLAYER69


If those older ancient HE lines did explore and spread out across the Pacific then later interbred with later 'Out of Africa' waves of HS, it would explain how the later "Explorers/Seafarers' knew of this or that island/location hundreds or thousands of miles over the horizon simply because of stories were passed down by word of mouth generation to generation.

Consequently, when later known historic or even recent prehistoric HS seafarers sailed the Pacific they knew of their destination beforehand.

Not just because of stories, but also through observations such as cloud patterns, wave refraction, bird life etc as well as water temperature and currents. These were proficient sea going people who were, arguably the best sailors around, certainly much better than the (generally)P shore-hugging vikings...

Polynesian navigation...turn on your speakers

originally posted by: aorAki

originally posted by: punkinworks10

The Lapita populated all of oceana and remote oceana, and well into western polynesia.

Not all of Oceania.
There is no record of Lapita Pottery in New Zealand.
The closest, however, is in New Caledonia.
I remember talking with someone about why this was so, but damnit, I can't, for the life of me, remember.

Excellent thread, Slayer.

You sir are correct, they didnt reach all of Oceana, specifically new zealand. Which i find very suprising since they made it most of the way there. Actually pottery isnt the only signal for a Lapita presence, the extiction of large land birds is also a hallmark of their presence. Every island they settled saw extictions of birds.

originally posted by: punkinworks10


You sir are correct, they didnt reach all of Oceana, specifically new zealand. Which i find very suprising since they made it most of the way there. Actually pottery isnt the only signal for a Lapita presence, the extiction of large land birds is also a hallmark of their presence. Every island they settled saw extictions of birds.

Yes, however the extinction of the Moa was very much as a result of Maori hunting.

We had giant geese and penguins etc as well, but there is nothing to link their extinctions with human occupation, and certainly nothing in the palynological or archaeological record that would suggest an occupation prior to Maori. I find this interesting. I have some people to ask some questions of, and when they reply I shall share their answers.

a reply to: aorAki
The fact that the Moa was there till the polynesians show up is good evidence that they were the first people to NZ. I'll try to find the paper on Lapita bird extinctions.

a reply to: punkinworks10

I would be interested in that.

It's not The prehistoric extinction of south pacific birds: catastrophy versus attrition is it?

On topic , New Zealand would have been relatively unaffected by sea level change and would have still required decent sea faring to arrive at.

A lower sea level did allow the giant carnivorous land snail Powelliphanta to range between what are now the North and South Islands.

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: punkinworks10

I would be interested in that.

It's not The prehistoric extinction of south pacific birds: catastrophy versus attrition is it?

On topic

, New Zealand would have been relatively unaffected by sea level change and would have still required decent sea faring to arrive at.

A lower sea level did allow the giant carnivorous land snail Powelliphanta to range between what are now the North and South Islands.

Carnivorous snail?! holy crap

This might be the paper
www.sciencedirect.com...

and another on bird extinctions

www.sciencedirect.com...