It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Anyone want to talk Pre-Clovis Crap?

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 01:16 PM
Anyone want to talk Clovis CRAP

I find no culture more ancient than Clovis.
The coprolites and a bone do not replace an entire Paleo culture even if their dates are proven.

From Chattah Box News Blog
Oregon Caves Yield Rare Pre-Clovis Artifact 14,230 Years Old
(ChattahBox)—A series of caves and rock shelters located in the Summer Lake Basin north of Paisley in south-central Oregon, may hold evidence of the earliest Native Americans living in North America that has ever been discovered. An unassuming scraper-like tool fashioned from bone, found in one of the Paisley Caves, has been definitively carbon-dated as 14,230 years old, which is the oldest and only pre-Clovis artifact ever found in the Americas.

This exciting discovery lays waste to a still predominant theory that the earliest human inhabitants of North America, referred to as the Clovis culture, arrived here 12,900 to 12,400 years ago, while crossing the Bering Strait.

Scientists believe that pre-Clovis peoples migrated here south along the North American coastlines. The Paisley Caves are located upriver from the Pacific Ocean, placing them along the possible migration route of pre-Clovis Native Americans.

The recent excavation of the Paisley Caves was conducted by the Northern Great Basin Field School, with the University of Oregon, lead by archaeologist Dennis L. Jenkins. The head archaeologist presented his team’s exciting finding last month in a lecture at the University of Oregon. He explained that the simple bone tool was subjected to studies of sediment and radiocarbon dating, which suggested it belonged to a pre Clovis culture.

Jon Erlandson, an archaeologist at the University of Oregon said, “They can’t yet rule out the Paisley Cave people weren’t Clovis.” But none of the Clovis people’s distinct fluted spear and arrow points were found in the cave.

The only other American archaeological site older than Clovis, is at Monte Verde in Chile, which is about 13,900 years old.

Jenkins’ new finding lends further support to the theory that a pre-Clovis culture once inhabited the Paisley Caves. Last year, his team found coprolites, which are fossilized human excrement, that were dated to 14,000 to 14,270 years old. A DNA analysis showed that the coprolites were indeed human.

But experts questioned the age of the coprolites, suggesting that they were younger than the sediments they were found in. Other archaeologists questioned the pre-Clovis age of the coprolites, because no artifacts were found to corroborate their age.

Now, with the definitive find of a bone artifact, dating to 14,230 years old, archaeologists are starting to take notice of the importance of the Paisley Caves, as holding the key to the earliest human inhabitants of North America.

“The dating of the bone tool, and the finding that the sediments encasing it range from 11,930 to 14,480 years old might put these questions to rest. You couldn’t ask for better dated stratigraphy,” said Jenkins.


[mod edit: added source link and required external source tags]
Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by 12m8keall2c]

Mod Edit: Title at member request

[edit on 12/9/2009 by JacKatMtn]

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 01:44 PM
Part of the problem is it a long held belief humans in the new would could not have been here earlier then 11,500 years ago...Land bridge theory... so no one ever looks for older artifacts but it turns out we already have those older artifacts and they have been under our noses for a very long time...

In 1959, the partial skeletal remains of an ancient woman estimated to be 10,000 years old were unearthed in Arlington Springs on Santa Rosa Island, one of the eight Channel Islands off the southern California coast. They were discovered by Phil C. Orr, curator of anthropology and natural history at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History. The remains of the
so-called Arlington Springs woman were recently reanalyzed by the latest radiocarbon dating techniques and were found to be approximately 13,000 years old.
The new date makes her remains older than any other known human skeleton found so far in North America.

The discovery challenges the popular belief that the first colonists to North America arrived at the end of the last ice age about 11,500 years ago by crossing a Bering land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska and northwestern Canada. The earlier date and the location of the woman's remains on the island adds weight to an alternative theory that some early settlers may have constructed boats and migrated from Asia by sailing down the Pacific coast.

The Arlington Springs woman lived during the end of the Pleistocene era when large herds of bison and woolly mammoths roamed the grassy plains and other extinct native American animals such as camels, horses, and saber-toothed cats were still around.

The remains of Pleistocene-era animals have been discovered on Santa Rosa Island where the Arlington Springs woman was found. In 1994, the world's most complete skeleton of a pygmy mammoth, a dwarf species, was also excavated here.

13,000 is a lot closer to your 14,000 ... now maybe they well go back and take a closer look at what is already in their collections

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:48 PM
reply to post by DaddyBare

I am glad I read your link. I was going to point out that there were those pygmy mammoths.
They were believed to have lived to near 3,000 years ago??? Yet all the ones on the continent were supposedly extinct by 8,000 years ago.
To be fair IMO all the other material found by others should also be re-tested by "The Latest Radio Carbon Dating Techniques". Don't ya think?
I am not saying that the Gal is not !3,000 years old, or even older. I am saying that even if she is----
Does she represent a CULTURE? Like Clovis.
Those islands are cool. Thanks for the post.

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:12 PM
My apologies if this is a speck off topic, but it's pretty interesting nonetheless.

In the November 26 edition of my local paper, it was announced that 10,000 year old stone weapons from the first humans to have lived in Ontario were discovered during an archaeological dig taking place on the site of a sports complex currently under construction.

Here's the link to the on-line version of the article:

Hopefully there is enough appreciation for the significance of this unprecedented find that further study will take place.

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by GoneGrey

Not off topic at all IMO. It is probably the interest in this site you mention that led me to posted this Clovis/Pre -Clovis thread.
It would be neat if you keep us up to date about further investigation there. The dates are Paleo and right up against what I hope we will be talking about for a while. Canada has a wealth of Mega Fauna remains that are startling. Like Siberia.
thanks Donny

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:58 PM
reply to post by Donny 4 million

Do you also dispute the findings at the Monte Verde site in Chile, as mentioned in the article?

Monte Verde

Monte Verde is an archaeological site in south-central Chile, which has been dated to 14,500 years BP (Before Present). This dating adds to the evidence showing that settlement in the Americas pre-dates the Clovis culture by roughly 1000 years. This contradicts the previously accepted "Clovis First" Model which holds that settlement of the Americas began after 13,500 years BP (Before Present). The Monte Verde findings were initially dismissed by most of the scientific community, but in recent years the evidence has become more widely accepted in some archaeological circles, although vocal "Clovis First" advocates remain.

According to Tom Dillehay and his team, the Monte Verde site was occupied around 14,800 – 13,800 BP by about twenty to thirty people. A twenty-foot-long tent-like structure of wood and animal hides was erected on the banks of the creek and was framed with logs and planks staked in the ground, making walls of poles covered with animal hides. Using ropes made of local reeds, the hides were tied to the poles creating separate living quarters within the main structure. Outside the tent-like structure, two large hearths had been built for community usage, most probably for tool making and craftwork.

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 07:12 PM
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

It is not that I dispute the finds or dates outright.
But as you will see when you scrutinize the data and true artifacts you certainly do not have much.
Most of all is the fact that this site was so washed by the creek that I would find it hard to claim the strata reliable.
In any event the site still would not designate a specific culture.
Although I find the site most interesting. A number of similar sites with identical findings would be nice. You can bet they have been digging up a storm around there since the discovery of Monte Verde.
One of my goals here is to possibly categorize the artifacts presented in the thread as Pre Clovis and have a real good look at the lot.
Would you be interested in posting the artifacts from Monte Verde? Photographically as well as descriptions?
Maybe DaddyBare and GoneGray could do the same for theire sites?
It would be terriffic if we could find and document them all for the first time right here on ATS.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Donny 4 million]

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Donny 4 million]

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 09:29 PM
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

Thanks for the links ferris.
But even if this site is 12,500years old, it does not seperate it from Clovis IMO. Were the Clovis points right above this layer?
What did the projectiles look like that they had?
There are sort of dirty tricks being tried here IMO.
Let me point out just one that ticks me off.
They took off 6 feet of archeological data with a bulldozer, A BULLDOZER
just to attempt to prove their point. What if they dug just 2 or 3 inches to deep?????

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Donny 4 million]

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Donny 4 million]

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 09:45 PM
The recent Nation Geographic Human Family Tree experiment says this:

Haplogroup - First appearing about 50,000 years ago, Haplogroup B is found in around 20% of people from East Asia. It was also one of the founding lineages in the Americas.

So according to the DNA data, the peoples of North and South America go back 50,000 years, a long time past 11,000! So maybe it is time that all the text books got updated hey??

posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 10:45 PM
reply to post by WorldObserver

No doubt. I have a thread that is going no where about those genes in relationship to the origin of the use of alcohol.
Anything in major media is suspect with me. You know political agenda.
Nat Geo did a hatchet job on 911 IMO. Seems they want to stick their nose and opinion in anything and everything nowadays.
The best part about it is ---we can use this stuff to build a comprehensive
compilation of the technology and artifacts right here on ATS and make up our own minds independently. Understanding the DNA would be a plus but you can't see it.

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:37 AM
When they get a couple good clovis skeletons then i believe we will have a major rewrite of his

I believe they will be found to have migrated from Europe.
I also believe there was a group of boat people that landed in south America after coming across the Pacific. Monte Verde?
I know from geological evidence that there were 2 mile thick ice sheets that came down over north America and Europe/Asia

But how far did the ice sheets from antarctica extend and was it possible for a group to fallow this ice across the pacific to south America.

For Monte Verde a fast migration rate of a mile a year average would have put them coming from Asia at least 6,000 years before the 14,500 years BP dating of the site.
that would put the first humans in America at 20,500 years BP.

but with sea levels a 150 feet lower there would have been many more islands in the pacific to island hop.
Possible trans-oceanic contact
For more details on this topic, see Models of migration to the New World.
[edit] Polynesians

Between 300 and 1200 CE, Polynesians in canoes spread throughout the Polynesian Triangle going as far as Easter Island, New Zealand and Hawaii, and perhaps on to the Americas. The sweet potato, which is native to the Americas, was widespread in Polynesia when Europeans first reached the Pacific. Sweet potato has been radiocarbon-dated in the Cook Islands to 1000 CE, and current thinking is that it was brought to central Polynesia circa 700 CE and spread across Polynesia from there.[2] It has been suggested that it was brought by Polynesians who had traveled to South America and back, or that South Americans brought it to the Pacific. It has been argued that it is unlikely that the plant could successfully float across the ocean by natural means.[3]

A 2007 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of chicken bones at El Arenal near the Arauco Peninsula, Arauco Province, Chile claimed to provide "unequivocal evidence for a pre-European introduction of chickens to South America".[4] Chickens originated in southern Asia and the Araucana species of Chile was thought to have been brought by the Spaniards around 1500; however, the bones found in Chile were radiocarbon-dated to between 1304 and 1424, well before the documented arrival of the Spanish. DNA sequences taken were exact matches to those of chickens from the same period in American Samoa and Tonga, both over 5,000 miles (8,000 km) away from Chile. The genetic sequences were also similar to those found in Hawaii and in Easter Island, the closest island at 2,500 miles (4,000 km), and unlike any breed of European chicken.

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:48 AM
Ancient America Rocked!

To date, no consistent pre-Clovis cultural patterns have been established and the accuracy of these claims have been found controversial and unverified.


Topper is an archaeological site located along the Savannah River in Allendale County, South Carolina in the United States. It is noted as the location of controversial artifacts believed by some archaeologists to indicate human habitation of the New World as far back as 50,000 years ago.

Monte Verde

Monte Verde is an archaeological site in south-central Chile, which has been dated to 14,500 years before present.[1] It pre-dates the earliest known Clovis culture site of Clovis, New Mexico, by 1000 years, contradicting the previously accepted "Clovis model" which holds that settlement of the Americas began after 13,500 years before present. As such the Monte Verde findings were initially dismissed by most of the scientific community, but in recent years the evidence has been widely accepted,[2][3] although vocal "Clovis-first" advocates remain.[4]

Cactus Hill

Cactus Hill is an archaeological site in the U.S. state of Virginia. It lies in the southeastern part of the state on the Nottoway River roughly 45 miles south of Richmond. The site, owned by the International Paper Corporation, is situated on sand dunes above the river. The site has yielded multiple levels of early occupation. Archaic stage material is underlain by fluted stone tools associated with the Clovis culture dated to 10,920 BP. A lower level yields artifacts including unfluted bifacial stone tools with dates ranging from c. 15,000 to 17,000 years ago. White pine charcoal from a hearth context on this level dates to 15,070 radiocarbon years BP[1]. Further charcoal deposits retrieved at the site date to as early as 19,700 years ago, although these deposits may have been made by forest fires.Cactus Hill is arguably the oldest archaeological dig in North America.

OK so the verdict is still out on who the first true Native Americans were. This however should not downplay their amazing accomplishments! I always shutter when I see old movies or read old books that make statements that Native Americans were uncivilized. I still cringe even as I type this. It seems that wherever we see great accomplishments in Native American cultures there always has to be some outside influence that is responsible. Africans are responsible for the Oldest Mesoamericans the Olmec . Even with Central America there seems to be some controversy over who they were and where did they come from. Especially with the Olmec who were before the Maya and Aztec

[edit on 7-12-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by ANNED


Yes I have some well studied friends in the DC area that hold fast to European leaf like blades being dredged up in the Chesapeake Bay. There were reports of red headed Indians in New England by early Europeans.

Easter Island is not all that far from the mainland and the winds are right. Kon Tiki.
Clovis is not all that scares compared to anything 20,000 years ago.
The chicken bones are new to me and good evidence.
thanks Donny

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:10 AM

[edit on 7-12-2009 by Donny 4 million]

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:06 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69


I am quite familiar with these sites. I do need to up date as these digs have been going on for quite some time.
What is for sure ---- is --- that all excavated Clovis material would fill Yankee Stadium but the total pre -Clovis
stuff would only fill one seat. And it would vary largely from location to location.
There is no doubt that there has to be a pre Clovis tradition. Be it in Asia or Europe or both.
IMO there needs to be a more linear development leading up to the dynamic 8 inch, hinge fracture fluted, Clovis projectile. Anything found to date does not bridge that void.
I wish I was not such a computer dummy. I would post some photos of Clovis compared to the supposed pre-Clovis projectiles.
Thanks for the input to this incredibly interesting mystery.

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:16 PM
The chicken bone stuff was shown to be not true.

You'll find it right here at ATS, in this section.

The sweet potato thing is a real mystery.


posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:10 PM
reply to post by Harte

Help me out here. If you can.
Was there a mistake in identification or was it more like a hoax?
Thanks Donny

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:20 PM
No discussion of Clovis is complete without inclusion of the Younger Dryas cooling.

The best evidence points to a comet either impacting or exploding over the Laurentide ice sheet, causing a 1,500 year cooling period and the disapearance of both the megafauna and the Clovis people. Teh Clovis people were widespread over the continent, which bespeaks a long presence prior to the Younger Dryas event, most likely on the order of 40,000 to 50,000 years. There is a strong possibility of fairly high (for neolithic) cultural and technological development that was lost after the disaster.

Certainly subsequent high development of both astronomy and agriculture would seem to support it.

If there was a higher-than-believed level of development that was wiped by something that fell from the stars, wouldn't that incentivize the survivors to develop astronomy post-haste? How else do you explain the impetus for tracking very long cycles of things that aren't easily observable?

The calendar round was adequate for most common purposes, since the lifespan of the average Maya would not typically have exceeded 52 years. But an entirely different calendar system called the “long count” was used to date events in relation to one another and to describe dates far in the past or future. The long count calendar, like the tzolk’in, is not astronomically calibrated. It consists of five nested cycles of increasing size, and dates were written in a kind of positional notation. Dates inscribed on buildings and stelae usually include the long count, haab, and tzolk’in notations. Most anthropologists agree that the long count date 0 corresponds to the Gregorian date August 11, 3114 BCE, and that the last date expressible in the same iteration of the long count will be December 21, 2012. Among New Age and occultist circles, much portentous fanfare has been made of the correspondence of this terminal date with some sort of impending global cataclysm.

If you go back three Long Counts (5,126 years each), you come up with 15,372 years ago, or about 13,000 BCE, which places it at the Younger Dryas event.

The wide variety of food plants bred to grow in extreme conditions looks like survivor tech to me, developed to combat the harsh conditions faced after impact:

But the new evidence strongly suggests that it was the impact event 12,900 years ago which triggered the YD. The evidence for the event (and its timing) is considerable, including not just nanodiamonds, but enrichment in Iridium (to 5,000 times background crust levels) and Nickel, and extraterrestrial Helium. Furthermore, the impactor probably exploded in the atmosphere, releasing tremendous quantities of heat which ignited forest fires over much of North America. The signs of massive burning are also numerous, including charcoal, soot, PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), carbon spherules, glass-like carbon, and fullerenes. As fascinating as is the climate impact of such an event, the effects on living things are equally thought-provoking. The Clovis people of prehistoric North America (known for the use of the “Clovis point” to tip their spears) declined quickly after the event, and the YD impact is suggested as a trigger; Clovis artifacts are plentiful in sediments below the layer containing the evidence of impact, but practically absent from layers above it. In fact the YD impact is suggested as the root cause of the extinction of megafauna like Mammoths and Mastodons, which would have suffered greatly from destruction of their ecosystem by wildfires, and reduced food supply due to other ecological changes. Hence their eradication may have had nothing to do with overhunting by early humans, but been due to destruction wrought by the impact of an extraterrestrial object.

So my money is on a relatively high culture in the Americas which was wiped out by comet impact, which also flooded shore settlements globally, Yonaguni among them; probably THE Flood that most cultures remember:

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 02:45 PM

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
reply to post by Harte

Help me out here. If you can.
Was there a mistake in identification or was it more like a hoax?
Thanks Donny

The Date Was Off
Donny, you know you can use the search function too!
"Chicken bone" as search terms, searched thread titles, one return. This was it.

I'm constantly saying "this info is available right here at ATS." So few people actually try to find it.


top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in