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.

 

New study suggests early humans 250,000 years ago were more advanced than thought.

page: 4
35
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Imhotepic

Refer to Old American Human Site

They 'think' they were here for the first time 14000 years ago

800000 yo men

Add that to the work done by that female archaeologist who found 450,000 year old artifacts but
was excommunicated from her profession for those results.

The pyramids are 13,500 yo and predate Gobekli Tepe, so the text books have been and still are miles off the truth
that advanced civilizations of men existed a very long time ago.


edit on 16-8-2016 by Drawsoho because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Marduk

Yeah, they dated it using the potassium argon method and then later with the more accurate argon argon method.

Its accurate up to 1.25 billion years


Why would we use a less precise dating method to disprove a more precise dating method? all I am saying is this - carbon date these supposed million year old fossils; if there is no C-14 remaining then that supports the case of the very old earth, but if there is C-14 remaining we have to reconfigure our ideas of history.

To mock this proposition is exactly the attitude that hinders scientific progress.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

When was the last time we snuck up on a herd of deer close enough to hit one with a thrown stick?


Well, for me it was last fall when I got one with my bow. Grant you, the throwing part was sort of indirect. But it was a thrown stick, at the heart of things.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Imhotepic


Videos of suburban preteens killing small game can easily be viewed on youtube.

I doubt kids were allowed along on hunting parties except to observe. Taking down large game involved a variety of methods, all of which were extremely dangerous.


Au contraire! I often used my younger cousins and later my kids on squirrel hunts. I even had a terrier at one time I had trained to provide squirrel hunting assistance. Never had any luck teaching my horse, though.

Basically, you see which tree the squirrels are in. Then you send out the assistant, man or dog, to slowly circle the tree, making some noise. The tree rat, which in other cases would hide behind the tree to watch you, will refocus on the noisy kid or dog, and begin orbiting the tree in an attempt to keep most of the tree between himself and the kid. Bang.

Even if the other squirrels see you do it, they can't help moving around the tree to follow the dog. It's a quick and easy way to get a mess of them.

In a similar way, if I had a pile of kids and some hunters with bows that were very good, I'd pre-position the kiddos at the upwind head of a long ravine or draw or some similar ground structure and let them sit there for a long while, whilst the rest of us got to the other end quietly, then just about dawn I'd have some of them walk down the draw and some down the ridges slowly. The deer will walk down the draw to get away from them, paying too much attention to the kids and not enough to the mighty hunters at the end. And Thag's your uncle.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam


Au contraire! I often used my younger cousins and later my kids on squirrel hunts.


Ever take them big game hunting in Africa, on foot, with spears?

Hey kids, have I got an adventure for you.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: intrptr

When was the last time we snuck up on a herd of deer close enough to hit one with a thrown stick?


Well, for me it was last fall when I got one with my bow. Grant you, the throwing part was sort of indirect. But it was a thrown stick, at the heart of things.


Cool, did you shoot from ambush in a blind or stalk it? Dd you make that bow yourself? Did you drive there and drive back out? Is the meat in an electric freezer?



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69

Very good post and interesting for you to point out.

It is clear our history has been wiped! By who or collection who's who have clearly obliterated our past. Schools teach dubbed down, conflicting, otherwise ignorant and clearly broken stories to our children. Those teachings come from those in power and thus are the ones to question our scattered history of lies.

We sure have taken a long time to stand where we stand today. Maybe multiple times we have come to our current situation and flourished and left or still here trying to get it right for the second, third, forth time. Either way, it is clear it would have taken much longer that recorded history to develop into what we are today.




posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackProject Schools teach dubbed down, conflicting, otherwise ignorant and clearly broken stories to our children. Those teachings come from those in power and thus are the ones to question our scattered history of lies. :

Schools teach basic history, not advanced. I learned about the Romans, the Vikings, Henry VIII and World war 2.
Your claim here is akin to saying that if we taught more nuclear classes at school we'd have better nuclear scientists, well yes, we would, we would also have a vast majority of kids for whom study Nuclear fission would be an utter waste of time



originally posted by: BlackProjectWe sure have taken a long time to stand where we stand today. Maybe multiple times we have come to our current situation and flourished and left or still here trying to get it right for the second, third, forth time. Either way, it is clear it would have taken much longer that recorded history to develop into what we are today.



This last statement shows a complete ignorance of Genetics, which proves we are here doing this for the first time, if you want to build claims about Homo erectus, or Homo Neandertahlis, that would be open minded, but making already debunked claims about homo sapiens isn't doing you any favours



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: SLAYER69

"Advanced" happened when people learned to write. That and whatever drove domestications beginning.

There are crafty animals within any species. The heron that learned to fish using a piece of bread....that is a stroke of animal genius. But the inability to communicate that to others, and transfer/store that information in a meaningful way, is what keeps that heron from making all herons crafty.

Side note: "wild cattle"....aka, the Auroch. Just thinking about having to hunt/kill an auroch with stone spears makes me feel queasy.

Which is why we need open borders and free exchange of information, so we all we can learn from each other. Oop, terribly sorry my political brain got triggered. All this Trump business and Hillary stuff has me wired up.

Regarding the OP, I think there was a dramatic shrinking of the human population about 80,000 years ago due to a supervolcanic eruption. Keep in mind they were constantly in periol and sheltering themselves from each other too. Maybe the advancment of human civilization is more like trying to get an old car started--sometimes it needs a lot of help.
en.wikipedia.org - Toba catastrophe theory...

I know it's just a theory that the supervolcano eruption impacted humans significantly, but I do think evolution may not be this amazignly rapid thing you and many other posts here are expecting. It also rmeinds me of what Jeff Hawkins was talking about in his AI work. He mentioned how the AI would make slow progress for long periods of time and then suddenly it'd be like a rennaisance and it'd make big leaps. I know it's not related and I know it's spurious for me to bring it up, but I can't help it.
edit on 8/16/2016 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Bedlam


Au contraire! I often used my younger cousins and later my kids on squirrel hunts.


Ever take them big game hunting in Africa, on foot, with spears?

Hey kids, have I got an adventure for you.


For big game, you run them off cliffs or into mud. At least that's how some of my ancestors did it



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

See, your question was did I sneak up on them and hit them with a thrown stick. And that answer was yes.

If I had to do it from zero, I'd use a deadfall.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I don't understand how this is really news.

The use of stone tools and hunting were already known to be at least 2 million years old. Is it really groundbreaking to discover early man butchering animals 250,000 years ago?



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Bedlam


Au contraire! I often used my younger cousins and later my kids on squirrel hunts.


Ever take them big game hunting in Africa, on foot, with spears?

Hey kids, have I got an adventure for you.


For big game, you run them off cliffs or into mud. At least that's how some of my ancestors did it

Yah, get a rock slide started, poison some food or water, pit fall or stumble, snares, whatever. Thats called trapping, not hunting.

Big game hunting by the stalk, with weapons fashioned by your hand, is the highest art form. So is growing crops for that matter. Remember I mean back when it mattered, not today when everything is provided.
edit on 16-8-2016 by intrptr because: Edit:



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: intrptr

See, your question was did I sneak up on them and hit them with a thrown stick. And that answer was yes.

If I had to do it from zero, I'd use a deadfall.


I was asking if you did it from ambush like a blind or if you tracked, stalked and dispatched it.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: intrptr

See, your question was did I sneak up on them and hit them with a thrown stick. And that answer was yes.

If I had to do it from zero, I'd use a deadfall.


I was asking if you did it from ambush like a blind or if you tracked, stalked and dispatched it.


That would be yes. I find it's a lot more straightforward if you use a horse. But I have done it with and without. I generally scout the area and find where they're moving. Sometimes it's easier to build a blind on a path but sometimes you have to jump them.
edit on 16-8-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Drawsoho
a reply to: Imhotepic

Refer to Old American Human Site

They 'think' they were here for the first time 14000 years ago

800000 yo men

Add that to the work done by that female archaeologist who found 450,000 year old artifacts but
was excommunicated from her profession for those results.

The pyramids are 13,500 yo and predate Gobekli Tepe, so the text books have been and still are miles off the truth
that advanced civilizations of men existed a very long time ago.


It was 250,000 year old artifacts and she didn't suffer one whit for it - she did run into professional trouble though.

She was a grad student temporarily working the site for the USGS, and submitted a paper on the site before the lead Archaeologist had finalized her findings.
That sort of thing is frowned on in any vocation.

You should note that the lead Archaeologist - Cynthia Irwin-Williams - published her own paper on the site laying out the argument for these ancient dates. Funny how her career wasn't harmed, eh?

Harte



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
You should note that the lead Archaeologist - Cynthia Irwin-Williams - published her own paper on the site laying out the argument for these ancient dates. Funny how her career wasn't harmed, eh?
Harte

She was pretty up-front about the quandary. That was 1969...has the dating been revisited using current tech?
I would also reference a book called Bones: discovering the first Americans by Elaine Dewar. I've provided a link to the eBook. She's pretty critical, isn't always right, and the book is 15 years old but it would be interesting to compare some of her rant to today's knowledge base. (it's been a while since I read it)

Either way, if you want to exercise an opinion on the topic, it's worth a read.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Harte
You should note that the lead Archaeologist - Cynthia Irwin-Williams - published her own paper on the site laying out the argument for these ancient dates. Funny how her career wasn't harmed, eh?
Harte

She was pretty up-front about the quandary. That was 1969...has the dating been revisited using current tech?

There have been several forays into dating the site since the sixties, with varying results, but the antiquity hasn't gone away yet.

Harte



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte

Ah, yes, my facts were not right, but some physicist did date one
of the artifacts to 450,000 years old, and that is where I got that
number from. Good thing she didn't lose her career after all.

Now that that is said, the underlying feature still is present: Human
settlements existed maybe 1/2 a million years ago. That is far from
the story they teach e.g. the recent (within 15000 years) Clovis migration.
Any conclusions about these pre ice-age people have to be based on
the megalithic sites around the world. So much of history is not
known, perhaps 99% of all of history has passed and not been
recorded. Time erases all signs of human presence with wind,
rain, ice and earthquakes, but the megalithic sites withstand time
enough for us to see the structures made with multi-ton granite
blocks. These must have been created many 10's of thousands
of years ago. Since the sea was 200 ' shallower at the time of
the last ice-age, much evidence has been covered up in
modern times such as the Bahama road and the Yonaguni
structure.

It is not hard to believe people lived rich lives many thousands
of years ago and all trace of them has been covered up by sand
and in time these traces have disappeared forever.





edit on 16-8-2016 by Drawsoho because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Harte
You should note that the lead Archaeologist - Cynthia Irwin-Williams - published her own paper on the site laying out the argument for these ancient dates. Funny how her career wasn't harmed, eh?
Harte

She was pretty up-front about the quandary. That was 1969...has the dating been revisited using current tech?


Yes, there was some recent work done a couple of years back that came back with a date of 80 KA based on the dating of diatoms. These particular diatoms went extinct 80 KA snd the oldest examples I believe we're in the 260 KA range so the artifacts would have to be older than 80 and younger than 260 KA. It's not a particularly narrow time frame and obviously, there is still a bit of discontent at that age as well as the diatoms being the only current method used on the site so the jury is still out until further tests are done. At that age it would be really interesting because it becomes less likely that, if the dates can be corroborated, these people were HSS which opens up a whole new set of crazy questions and scenarios from H. Erectus to Heidelbergensis or Neanderthal. But we're a long way out from that level of speculation. It's just a fun thought exercise until more concrete data comes forth.

link.springer.com...


I would also reference a book called Bones: discovering the first Americans by Elaine Dewar. I've provided a link to the eBook. She's pretty critical, isn't always right, and the book is 15 years old but it would be interesting to compare some of her rant to today's knowledge base. (it's been a while since I read it)

Either way, if you want to exercise an opinion on the topic, it's worth a read.


I'm reading that right now actually. It was recommended by Punkinworks, based on your earlier recommendation. It's pretty interesting so far.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join