Evidence of human occupation in Mexico around the Last Glacial Maximum

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: punkinworks10

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Have you ever heard about the London Hammer or the human footprint that was found below a dinosaur print in Paluxy River? Both in different parts of Texas. Both are thought to be millions of years old by some, or used by others to say the earth is only 6,000 years old, and others claim both are hoaxes. But who really knows. As a religious guy myself, the Bible never said anything about time or how the earth is so I really don't know where the whole "6,000 years old" thing came from. Anyways, I think humans have been here far longer than 40,000 years. I think we may even be a third or fourth civilization, bound to fark ourselves again, and bound to be eradicated before the next civilization starts over. Maybe next time, we'll be the ones being called aliens while we buzz silently over earthlings and keep up with their progression for thousands of years.

Thed london hammer is unequivically a fake. it is a brand of prospecting hammer that was widely sold in Tx in the later part of ther 19th cent.

Yep that fake has been bouncing around for ages now almost a century. One of the darlings of the Creationists.

You could have made your point without that last sentence in there. Makes you look angry since it might somehow tie into someone's religion. There are plenty of things other than the hammer for that.

I dont know. I think his point stands on its own, particularly when you factor in that even other proponents of YEC loathe both the "London Artifact" amd Carl Baugh, the creationist who has promoted it since purchasing the hammer in 1983. Heck, even the Winter 1985 edition of 'Creation/Evolution Journal' dedicated 2 pages to anscientific rebuttal.of the so called artifact, by Anthropologist John Cole.

Thats a nicenwaymof saying that not even other young earth creationists believe the London Hammer is anything other than what geologists have shown it to be... A standard 19th century prospecting pick coated in a concretion.


One thing from another post of yours, who claims humans have only been here for 40KA? The.genus is nearly 3 MA. Much, much older than 40 KA

originally posted by: LSU2018

You could have made your point without that last sentence in there. Makes you look angry since it might somehow tie into someone's religion. There are plenty of things other than the hammer for that.

Nope it a correct description of how it is viewed and it was not directed at you.

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Xtrozero

No, when I say here, I mean on earth. And I think they were humans as well. But over a long period of time, they ended up basically where we're at today and we then eradicated outside of a few. It would depend on how civilization was destroyed as to whether or not things still stand. What would find if we dug into the ocean floor? Deep into the sand dunes throughout the deserts? How do we know Atlantis isn't a myth, and might be a city from a previous civilization? Most of civilization was wiped out in 40 day floods. And if you read the Bible, it tells of people who had life spans of hundreds of years before that event. Giants, people seen as gods, etc., all lead back to before the flood.

Ah we have done that. Excavations (in a controlled and recorded manner) have been on going for two and half centuries.

If those folks existed they didn't use pottery, bury their dead, use stone tools, build cities, mine or even eat shell fish- because all of those leave traces that last a LONG time.

The Bible is not a history or scientific book it was written by different people at different time trying to describe things they didn't understand and recording what they considered wisdom or spiritual thoughts.

originally posted by: LSU2018

No, when I say here, I mean on earth. And I think they were humans as well. But over a long period of time, they ended up basically where we're at today and we then eradicated outside of a few.

Evolution doesn't stop, humans today are not the humans 200k years ago or 200k in the future. Once you hit about a million+ years breeding is no longer capable, and would be called a different species. Go back a few million years and we talking something rather different than humans today.

It would depend on how civilization was destroyed as to whether or not things still stand. What would find if we dug into the ocean floor? Deep into the sand dunes throughout the deserts? How do we know Atlantis isn't a myth, and might be a city from a previous civilization? Most of civilization was wiped out in 40 day floods. And if you read the Bible, it tells of people who had life spans of hundreds of years before that event. Giants, people seen as gods, etc., all lead back to before the flood.

Maybe Atlantis was real and the height of technology for its time...which would be still 1000s of years from the tech we have today.

We can see in this chart when sea level were much lower and it is safe to assume there is a good amount of human history under water...What that means, who knows...as far as we know they were hunter gathers from about 15k and earlier.



As to giants I guess they are buried next to the unicorns... Personally I think there was a huge asteroid hit about 12800 years ago that came close to wiping most of the large animal life on the earth and was the bases for recordings like the great flood in the bible.

As to humans before that....I would say they were barely into farming and basic metals with still a lot of stone in use and there has been nothing to suggest otherwise.

originally posted by: Hanslune
Not to mention items we've left on the Moon and in orbit plus countless cut diamonds and other gems that will survive for huge periods of plus radioactive waste material, endless mines, gold coins, pottery, glass and etc., etc.

I also think that advancements are based on population size and communication abilities in that population. The idea of small civilizations advancing to high levels is remote at best, so high advancement would most likely touch much of the world as we see today as what humans have done in the last 1000 years. Human population just wasn't there and neither was communication capabilities.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Hanslune
Not to mention items we've left on the Moon and in orbit plus countless cut diamonds and other gems that will survive for huge periods of plus radioactive waste material, endless mines, gold coins, pottery, glass and etc., etc.

I also think that advancements are based on population size and communication abilities in that population. The idea of small civilizations advancing to high levels is remote at best, so high advancement would most likely touch much of the world as we see today as what humans have done in the last 1000 years. Human population just wasn't there and neither was communication capabilities.

What's required is a 'complex society' in which there is enough manpower to feed the population while others build the infrastructure...and generally a ruling/religious class to demand monuments to their magnificence. A pattern that repeats.

originally posted by: Hanslune
Perhaps but there were no teosinte cobs found that I am aware of and the current understanding is that maize was domesticated around 7000 BCE. The early plant only produced a 20 mm cob (less than an inch) with little food value.

I understand that's why native tribes such as the Pima used limestone grinding surfaces to maximize the nutritional value of the weak corn (and beans, apparently) that they did manage to grow.

a reply to: LSU2018

Isn't it just possible that its all a repeating cycle with an inevitable end date built in. That from hunting and gathering, people are constantly looking at easier ways to do things that require less physical effort, and energy input. The aids that enable this , are domestication of animals, then wheels for carts, and so on until you have planes automobiles, high rise buildings, which cause environmental degradation, which causes collapse , until the whole cycle starts again. Theirs only one way to build an internal combustion engine, or steam locomotive, the styling may be different but the essential parts are all dictated by the function. The modern age just appeared in a lifetime. Therefore it could be gone just as fast, simply because their is no where left to go. When you can sit at home and watch TV all day you have won the game, and a new one has to inevitably start.
Making a functioning canoe out of the raw materials nature provided must be infinitely more rewarding than , watching another episode of Coronation Street.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: LSU2018

Isn't it just possible that its all a repeating cycle with an inevitable end date built in. That from hunting and gathering, people are constantly looking at easier ways to do things that require less physical effort, and energy input.

Actually, anthropologists will tell you that h/g societies spent less hours a day 'making a living' than we do today.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: LSU2018

Isn't it just possible that its all a repeating cycle with an inevitable end date built in. That from hunting and gathering, people are constantly looking at easier ways to do things that require less physical effort, and energy input.

Actually, anthropologists will tell you that h/g societies spent less hours a day 'making a living' than we do today.

One Anthropologist called the HG lifestyle as; tedious bouts of labour for women, dangerous and demanding, but limited work, for men and a general attitude of slackness punctuated by feast and famine.

a reply to: Hanslune

It's like the punctuated equilibrium if daily needs instead of a short evolutionary leap

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Xtrozero

No, when I say here, I mean on earth. And I think they were humans as well.

Homo sapiens has been here for 200,000 years - that's quite a bit more than 40,000 years.
Also, since any member of the genus Homo is correctly referred to as "human," humans have actually been on Earth for about 2 million years.

Harte

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: LSU2018

Isn't it just possible that its all a repeating cycle with an inevitable end date built in. That from hunting and gathering, people are constantly looking at easier ways to do things that require less physical effort, and energy input.

Actually, anthropologists will tell you that h/g societies spent less hours a day 'making a living' than we do today.

One Anthropologist called the HG lifestyle as; tedious bouts of labour for women, dangerous and demanding, but limited work, for men and a general attitude of slackness punctuated by feast and famine.

Sounds like not much has changed.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

Sounds like not much has changed.

Harte

Absolutely, I was always a slacker at heart - not helped by growing up in Hawaii with its laid back style and carefree attitude toward life. I crammed a 5 year education into seven and half years. I couldn't go to college on Thursdays because that was beach and spear fishing day.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: LSU2018

Isn't it just possible that its all a repeating cycle with an inevitable end date built in. That from hunting and gathering, people are constantly looking at easier ways to do things that require less physical effort, and energy input.

Actually, anthropologists will tell you that h/g societies spent less hours a day 'making a living' than we do today.

One Anthropologist called the HG lifestyle as; tedious bouts of labour for women, dangerous and demanding, but limited work, for men and a general attitude of slackness punctuated by feast and famine.

Sounds like college!

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

I heard it took twenty hours of labor, looks like we have been ripped off.

I'm always interested in evidence that pushes the human migration history back. But this report has a long way to go to catch the Australians - current estimate being 65,000 years - and based on a lot more than dubious flints.

originally posted by: rnaa
I'm always interested in evidence that pushes the human migration history back. But this report has a long way to go to catch the Australians - current estimate being 65,000 years - and based on a lot more than dubious flints.

Why is it necessary for people to be in the Americas before Australia? It's generally accepted people moved out of Africa east so they would have got to Aus before Am. No one doubts it took time to traverse the Pacific/come up with tech to do it. I'm sure there were a lot of failed attempts. It a big, violent ocean with huge expanses of nothing you have to be able to survive.

The push now is to show they didn't just sit in Aus/East asia for 50k year before getting to the Americas across a magic land bridge that has always been a dubious theory.

originally posted by: FishBait

originally posted by: rnaa
I'm always interested in evidence that pushes the human migration history back. But this report has a long way to go to catch the Australians - current estimate being 65,000 years - and based on a lot more than dubious flints.

Why is it necessary for people to be in the Americas before Australia? It's generally accepted people moved out of Africa east so they would have got to Aus before Am. No one doubts it took time to traverse the Pacific/come up with tech to do it. I'm sure there were a lot of failed attempts. It a big, violent ocean with huge expanses of nothing you have to be able to survive.

The push now is to show they didn't just sit in Aus/East asia for 50k year before getting to the Americas across a magic land bridge that has always been a dubious theory.

www.nps.gov...

Yet that theory still exists supplemented by a more likely coastal travel theory by boat also.

www.nps.gov...

upload.wikimedia.org... g

originally posted by: FishBait

originally posted by: rnaa
I'm always interested in evidence that pushes the human migration history back. But this report has a long way to go to catch the Australians - current estimate being 65,000 years - and based on a lot more than dubious flints.

The push now is to show they didn't just sit in Aus/East asia for 50k year before getting to the Americas across a magic land bridge that has always been a dubious theory.

There's nothing dubious at all about Beringea. Think less of a tiny land bridge and more the 620,000 square miles of land at its peak. Without that land bridge we wouldn't have Saber Toothed Cats in N. America has they first evolved in Europe before moving first to Africa, then Asia and finally N. America.

Conversely, animals that evolved in N. America and later went extinct here, like horses and camelids, would never have found their way to Asia had Beringea not existed. It was actually somewhat of a temperate climate and devoid of glaciation as little snow fell there.

There were also at least 5 KA of human occupation of Beringea. When the sea levels started to slowly rise some went west back to Siberia and others went East into N. America.

There really isnt anything about it thats even slightly dubious.