It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: starswift
Loved your response.
Performance art in it's own right.
I could hook you up but...
I'm not engaging in debate, I just have stories that need to be told.
Sometimes the audience is indifferent or hostile.
Too far outside their experience and comfort zone.
I get it. As long as they have a few manners, as you do.
At least you challenged the Neanderthal, which at least shows you are critically engaged.
A requirement of a good audience.
She was aware she had a large amount of Neanderthal genes if the bumper sticker "Neanderthals, they are among us still" was any indication. She had married into a Native American population but where her ancestors came from she did not say.
The morphological expression unlike any I had ever seen in any modern populations, and I have traveled a lot.
What her ancestry was and tracing back where and through what geographic domains would be enlightening, no doubt.
The mechanism for perpetuating isolated gene pools within large modern populations would be amazing.
When I see a mystery, I let it be, the reason certain events unfold in your life is due to trust and because the great spirit wanted you to.
And can I be wrong, no doubt.
But I wonder, does posting on ATS qualify as scientific debates, amongst various pseudonyms and acronyms?
originally posted by: gort51
There were humans in the American Continents, a long time, prior to the Asia/Siberian migration.
A recently published article.
Eventually this Out of Africa theory will be disproved, and it will be shown that Early Homo Erectus was actually the direct Grandaddy of all Homo Sapiens,
and Homo Sapiens developed automonously from the original Homo Erectus, in many parts of our Planet, at various degrees of "Development". Then of course mixed breeds/tribes etc etc, thru migration, conquest etc . (thats my theory anyway...not that it means anything .
Interestingly, Only the Australian early man, and the South American tribes, use the "Woomera" throwing stick, which attaches to the end of a thin spear, to vastly increase its travel and power
.........oh and the boomerang....both unique and technical inventions. (I did read that the Egyptians used a sort of boomerang too...interesting that)
Such was the case with the Tarairiu, a Tapuya tribe of migratory foragers and raiders inhabiting the forested mountains and highland savannahs of Rio Grande do Norte in mid-17th-century Brazil. Anthropologist Harald Prins offers the following description: “The atlatl, as used by these Tarairiu warriors, was unique in shape. About 88 cm (35 inches) long and 3 to 4.5 cm (1½ inches) wide, this spear thrower was a tapering piece of wood carved of brown hard-wood. Well-polished, it was shaped with a semi-circular outer half and had a deep groove hollowed out to receive the end of the javelin, which could be engaged by a horizontal wooden peg or spur lashed with a cotton thread to the proximal and narrower end of the throwing board, where a few scarlet parrot feathers were tied for decoration. [Their] darts or javelins… were probably made of a two-meter long wooden cane with a stone or long and serrated hard-wood point, sometimes tipped with poison. Equipped with their uniquely grooved atlatl, they could hurl their long darts from a great distance with accuracy, speed, and such deadly force that these easily pierced through the protective armor of the Portuguese or any other enemy
originally posted by: gort51
a reply to: peter vlar
Thanks Peter for that information, interesting....So my theory IS correct then .
Tho I wish you people would'nt refer to the "throwing stick" as an "Atlatl".
It is a WOOMERA, as the Australian Native culture and existence, is many 10 of 1000s of years older than Aztec South Americans, please use the word of the Original creators of the weapon.....well one of the words, there are 500 original languages in Australia.
Interesting the European connection, just adds more weight to the argument that the Australian native has a direct European probable Neanderthal heritage....among its origins.
Yes Peter, some information is 16 years old, but that doesnt mean you throw it all out.
Einstein's Theories are near 100 years old, and some still stand today.
This to me, suggests there wasnt a lot of interaction between the tribes of North and South, and the Aust. native predates by a long period, all of Africa modern man, all of European modern man and all of Asia.....
Some theories do postulate that Modern Homo actually DID develop in Australia and spread from there...of course over the years going backwards and forwards from one area to the next and back again, because of climate change, mixing with other Proto sapiens etc, things we have seen ourselves in Modern Mans movements even in only the past 500 years.
You should come to Australia Peter and expand your Neanderthal research .......you may be a pioneer discoverer of something.....
originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: gort51
Early homo erectus came from Africa. I don't see how that could possibly disprove OOA. Thus far all evidence points to OOA. Every species that colonized Europe and/or Asia originally came from Africa (based on the fossils). Many folks seem quite desperate to disprove OOA, but it's the only theory with objective evidence, and I do get quite suspicious as to why people are so offended by the idea that their ancient ancestors came from Africa. I've never seen any valid reasoning that they evolved somewhere else first. Each hominid species' earliest fossils can be traced to Africa, except maybe Denisovans, and the only evidence we have of them is some teeth and a few fragments.