New Evidence Puts Man In North America 50,000 Years Ago- Atlantis?, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times


reply posted on 30-1-2008 @ 07:15 AM by merka
reply to post by IvanZana


Atlantis? Obviously not. Atlanteans used bronze age technology (at the very minimum). The article says they found stone tools, ie a stone age society at best. Since paleolithic stone age extends from like 2.5 million years to 10,000 BC, 50,000 years aint all that shocking to me.


reply posted on 30-1-2008 @ 08:09 AM by forestlady
This isn't actually new news, it's several years old. Here's an article about Dr. Albert Goodyear.

www.archaeology.org...

You can also check out the Dr. at Wikipedia, where it says that this discovery is controversial; meaning mainstream doesn't go along with it, but then they're not known to accept new information easily.


reply posted on 30-1-2008 @ 08:15 AM by JohnnyCanuck
Originally posted by merka
reply to
post by IvanZana


Atlantis? Obviously not. Atlanteans used bronze age technology (at the very minimum). The article says they found stone tools, ie a stone age society at best. Since paleolithic stone age extends from like 2.5 million years to 10,000 BC, 50,000 years aint all that shocking to me.


Stars awarded to you for not drinking the koolaid. Topper is one of a handful of 'troubling' sites around the Americas that indicated a population...however small...before the end of the last ice age. Once that 11kya bracket paradigm was broken down as it was by Tom Dillehay at Monte Verde in Chile, well now almost anything is possible. There was talk of 100kya stone tools in the Great Lakes (Thomas Lee), and 200kya at Calico, in California (Louis Leakey. No need to haul Atlantis into the equasion...let's give paleoindians and their forebears their due.


reply posted on 30-1-2008 @ 10:18 AM by Harte
Originally posted by forestlady
This isn't actually new news, it's several years old. Here's an article about Dr. Albert Goodyear.

www.archaeology.org...

You can also check out the Dr. at Wikipedia, where it says that this discovery is controversial; meaning mainstream doesn't go along with it, but then they're not known to accept new information easily.

I've been following Goodyear's work at the Topper site for years.

"Mainstream" has problems with it because what Goodyear has called "tools" could just as easily be merely broken rock. More study is required but at the moment these "tools" do not exhibit any sign of human manufacture.

When "mainstream" doesn't completely accept something, "mainstream" publishes their reason for holding off on accepting. If anyone really cared about the facts of the case, they could have easily discovered why it is that Goodyear's claims have yet to be completely accepted.

There is no cover-up or "holding on to their jobs" involved here. Goodyear has simply yet to make his case.

I hope he eventually can, myself, but there's no guarantee.

Harte


reply posted on 30-1-2008 @ 11:31 AM by Harte
reply to post by IvanZana



Although the following website is concerned primarily with Pre-Clovis sites in Texas, if you scroll down to the bottom you'll find links to sites in other states, including Goodyear's Topper site in South Carolina.

PreClovis.com

Harte
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Ancient Aliens & The Riddle of the Missouri Mystery Mound
  Posted 18 days ago with 75 member flags
Amazing, X-Ray probe of Antikythera Mechanism (Video)
  Posted 16 days ago with 58 member flags
Eye of Horus is actually an early math system?
  Posted 13 days ago with 45 member flags
Pi, Golden Ratio and Speed of Light encoded into Great Pyramid
  Posted 7 days ago with 33 member flags
A Tribute to Native Americans
  Posted 19 days ago with 30 member flags
Why is the Ancient Alien Theory difficult to accept?
  Posted 12 days ago with 26 member flags
Unknown ancient language found on unearthed Assyrian tablets
  Posted 16 days ago with 21 member flags
"The Venus Blueprint"
  Posted 10 days ago with 14 member flags