Humans 80,000 Years Older than Previously Thought. 270,000 yr old tools.

Originally posted by IvanZana
Besides, if there were advanced humans 30,000-20,000+ years ago, how would you be able to tell their advancement by their bones? Tools you say? In africa you have modern cities while hundreds of kilometers away you have peoples living like they did 5000 years ago.

If in 20,000 years from now we lost our history, lets hope they dont dig somewhere in brazil or africa or they would think that around 2000 a.d humans were still using spears and living in huts.

Not really. Our roads and cities make permanent changes in the landscape, as does agriculture and mining efforts. We get lots of information from garbage pits and houses (people lose things in the house and the house decays... we find tools and other things that survived when their human owners crumbled to dust.)

We find campsites of humans 30,000 years ago (and much longer ago.) We find living areas that are 100,000 years old (remains of fire, jewelry, tools, bone of animals they killed, etc.)

An advanced civilization doesn't just suddenly show up out of nowhere -- just as an adult human doesn't suddenly appear out of thin air complete with computer and cell phone. That human had a mother and a father and grandparents and so forth and had a long childhood although they may not remember it. Genetic testing can link them to several groups.

Same with civilizations. If there's an advanced one, it came from not-so-advanced ones.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised to find some stone age/early bronze age peoples with a sophisticated culture and the date of "civilization" pushed back even as far as 15,000 years. But I'd be darn surprised to find electronics and high tech manufactured ceramics of that time period.

To me, the terrible part of the original article is that there is nothing to indicate what constitutes "human". The Omo finds (at 195,000 years) bear no specific designation along the Homo line as far as I can tell, Homo sapiens idaltu (Herto finds) being the oldest HS designation at 160,000 years. If we're talking about the Homo line itself, then Homo habilis, at roughly 2.4 million years ago makes the 276,000 year timeframe almost irrelevant. Seems to me that an agreed upon definition of "human" needs to be set before making claims of pushing back the "human" timeline.

cormac

this is silly.

to me, humans are very old.

look at what we did in 200 years

I think maybe we've been wiped out almost totally many times through out our history (Atlantis)

On a related note, it would appear that the earliest evidence of human habitation in the americas is from Chile:

www.sciencedaily.com...

There was also a Scientific American article about this from 2000.

I agree the problem here is the definition of Human. There were people living a hundreds of thousands of years ago not radically different from modern man. We tend to use the emergerge of Cro-magnon Man as a beginning place, but earlier men may have lacked knowledge of agriculture, shelter building, art, etc - but they were not necessarily less intelligent.


Mike F

Originally posted by IvanZana

...... it was not until this year that new dating techniques revealed the tools to be far older than the oldest known Homo sapien bones, which are around 195,000 years old. Using argon-argon dating—a technique that compares different isotopes of the element argon—researchers determined that the volcanic ash layers entombing the tools at Gademotta date back at least 276,000 years.

www.unexplained-mysteries.com...

Many of the tools found are small blades, made using a technique that is thought to require complex cognitive abilities and nimble fingers. "It seems that we were technologically more advanced at an earlier time that we had previously thought," said study co-author Leah Morgan, from the University of California, Berkeley.


It seems like every week something is found that renders history books and scholars pointless by having our past be pushed further and further back.


[edit on 10-12-2008 by IvanZana]

Ah yes that's not really a picture of man. More like erect up right walking ape man Enki borrowed some blood from to splice with his own to create the real version of what we are today. I wish people would stop with this Apeman crap.. So these apes could use tools, so can monkeys and rats..

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by IvanZana
Besides, if there were advanced humans 30,000-20,000+ years ago, how would you be able to tell their advancement by their bones? Tools you say? In africa you have modern cities while hundreds of kilometers away you have peoples living like they did 5000 years ago.

If in 20,000 years from now we lost our history, lets hope they dont dig somewhere in brazil or africa or they would think that around 2000 a.d humans were still using spears and living in huts.

Not really. Our roads and cities make permanent changes in the landscape, as does agriculture and mining efforts. We get lots of information from garbage pits and houses (people lose things in the house and the house decays... we find tools and other things that survived when their human owners crumbled to dust.)

We find campsites of humans 30,000 years ago (and much longer ago.) We find living areas that are 100,000 years old (remains of fire, jewelry, tools, bone of animals they killed, etc.)

An advanced civilization doesn't just suddenly show up out of nowhere -- just as an adult human doesn't suddenly appear out of thin air complete with computer and cell phone. That human had a mother and a father and grandparents and so forth and had a long childhood although they may not remember it. Genetic testing can link them to several groups.

Same with civilizations. If there's an advanced one, it came from not-so-advanced ones.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised to find some stone age/early bronze age peoples with a sophisticated culture and the date of "civilization" pushed back even as far as 15,000 years. But I'd be darn surprised to find electronics and high tech manufactured ceramics of that time period.

Ok you're talking purely on the scale 100-900,000 thousand years. In that time frame they found things barely recognizable on. So what about millions of years? Alloys, metals, electronics even without it being maintained after 200,000 thousand years would struggle to be standing. Most of that stuff breaks down during our life times so why would it still be around after it's been abandoned for thousands of years. I can't see your point being valid at all. Look at the Baghdad battery after a thousand years or how ever old it is.



[edit on 16-12-2008 by Quiintus]

Great topic Personally i think we the human race has been here many many times before....Take a look at this vid,it shows you how city's and every day items would become nothing more than a memory over time ..

video.google.com.au...

Originally posted by duffster
Great topic

Personally i think we the human race has been here many many times before....Take a look at this vid,it shows you how city's and every day items would become nothing more than a memory over time ..

video.google.com.au...

To an untrained surface dweller but not to an archaeologist. The remnants would whisper many things to their eyes.