It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could these be the oldest human footprints in North America?

page: 3
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: starswift
I was claiming something? not at all ; )

Just a quick follow up...I don't dispute your conclusion: "So the history of the Americas and hominid settlement and migration is far from a known known at this point."
I'm just questioning how you got there.




posted on Jun, 24 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   
NO. Here in Texas, there is a place where there is a human footprint in the SAME mud strata that dinosaur footprints are in. My school went there when I was in 6th grade on a field trip and I remember asking the property owner if it was a person's footprint: She said yes, but said it had to have been made after the dinosaurs and left me with little else.

I've been back to the location once after that, but never took a picture. I'll swing out there next time I visit my folks and will try and get a picture of it. It's very clearly what it is, it's the same size a normal adult foot, etc. No joke. I'm 30 now, but the rock hasn't changed in Texas for like 100M years, as far as I know. ;-)



posted on Jun, 24 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xterrain
NO. Here in Texas, there is a place where there is a human footprint in the SAME mud strata that dinosaur footprints are in. My school went there when I was in 6th grade on a field trip and I remember asking the property owner if it was a person's footprint: She said yes, but said it had to have been made after the dinosaurs and left me with little else.

I've been back to the location once after that, but never took a picture. I'll swing out there next time I visit my folks and will try and get a picture of it. It's very clearly what it is, it's the same size a normal adult foot, etc. No joke. I'm 30 now, but the rock hasn't changed in Texas for like 100M years, as far as I know. ;-)

Are you referring to the Paluxy River ‘footprints’? These tracks have received a substantial amount of study due to their popularity with proponents of 'Creation Science'. Here's a link to a site that refutes the story - your call as to what to make of it: Link

You know, the whole premise of the thread is that exciting things are happening in the archaeology of North America. Yes, there are attempts at suppression generally brought on by political interference, but it's damn hard to keep a secret... Link



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 10:24 AM
link   
I don't remember the name of the book.
It was by an Anthropologist who was aware of the latest discoveries and synthesized ahead of the scientific community
and has been uncannily accurate. He was aware of sites such as green meadows in south America where the dates were around 60,000 but the scientist believed there was an adjacent site that would prove out at well over 100,000 years before present.
That and scattered fossil remains from north and south America that were between 30,000 to 60,000 YBP.
He theorized that there had been a number of migration during glacial minimums at 30,000, 50,000 and possibly before.
Man has been using boats for hundreds of thousands of years as well. Clovis first proponents set an artificial horizon at 13,000 or so but that was because academics were out to protect the careers they had built from that theory and did not allow newer or more interesting evidence.
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I replied to the other thread.
Guess I don't respond well to challenges.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

edit on 25-6-2015 by starswift because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   
If I said they sky is blue would I need to prove it to you?
I think not.
Google it if the topic is of interest, you have enough to work with now.
I'm too old to care ; )
a reply to: peter vlar



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: starswift

So in your infinite wisdom you think a known fact is equitable with an unsubstantiated claim? Interesting approach to life you have there. Thanks for the tip but I'll pass on googling information to support your claims. If you don't care enough to provide valid citations then why should anyone else care enough to engage in due diligence that I Is lacking in your own end. Too old to care? It's the typical refrain when someone makes claims they know won't stand up to any scrutiny. The "more than enough information to work with now" claim is laughable. You just made further reference to non specific anecdotal BS. If you can't be bothered then you shouldn't expect anyone else to chase a rabbit down the hole based on your say so when it's apparent that once we reach in we will get sprayed as that rabbit is really a skunk. Anytime you want actually cite a source I would be more than happy to look at it and properly address it.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   
I'm still t old to care...
however, in our collective infinite wisdom we already know the answer.
So i forget, what was the question?
a reply to: Peter vlar


edit on 25-6-2015 by starswift because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:50 PM
link   
JohnnyC ,

Western Digs has a nice write-up on this find.


With pics,








 

The first of the prints was found last year, filled with black sand and traces of charcoal, a sample of which was radiocarbon-dated to 13,200 years ago.


“If I can duplicate these results, this will be the oldest known archaeological site on the west coast of Canada,” said Dr. Duncan McLaren of the University of Victoria, in an interview.






And 



Though the newly found prints were unexpected, such ancient evidence of human activity is not unheard of on Calvert Island.


McLaren and his colleagues, including Dr. Daryl Fedje of the University of Victoria, made the find while exploring near the site of an ancient coastal village believed to be at least 10,000 years old.




The impressions are in a gray clay,” McLaren said of the prints.


“It must have been soon after they were imprinted that they were filled with black sand, which is also charcoal-rich.


“We are not certain if this sand and charcoal was blown or washed over the prints.”




Western Digs



There is some very interesting work being done in that area.


 




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join