Arizona man finds what he believes will change American prehistoric history....

Arizona man finds what he believes are ancient artifacts

PHOENIX -- An amateur archaeologist said he has made a discovery that could change the theory of how America was first settled, but the tough part may be getting someone to listen.

Ken Stanton can hardly control his enthusiasm as he shows off a site in north-central Phoenix that he says contains some ancient artifacts. “You can see them all through here, that's an artifact there,” said Stanton, as he point them out.

And while to most people it may look like a pile of rocks, Stanton said this site could change everything we think about how the Americas were settled. “This would be the first Acheulean stone tools, proof of it in the Americas period," Stanton said.

OK this is pretty amazing. I can't speak for the veracity of this guys find but, If true it will turn anthropologists and archeology on it's ear. Acheulean by it's very nature is prehistoric. Wiki puts it as follows...

Acheulean is the name given to an archaeological industry of stone tool manufacture associated with early humans during the Lower Palaeolithic era across Africa and much of West Asia, South Asia, and Europe. Acheulean tools are typically found with Homo erectus remains. It is thought that they first developed out of the more primitive Oldowan technology as long as 1.76 million years ago, by Homo habilis.

There have been many controversial finds going back several decades here in the Americas too numerous to name them all. Now either he has found something worth further research or he just has an over active imagination and is just seeing what he wants in a pile of stones.

Should we let this possible find be dismissed? He does make a rather compelling argument.

As always, Stay tuned

Thoughts?

They Rock says, great find and thanks for sharing!

S&F

Another cool find Slayer! Well at least he does have a professional willing to look into it. The fringe archaeology has made it rather difficult for new finds to get legitimate investigation. Hopefully this will get a closer look.

Interesting but...

This seems to be a local tabloid blowing this supposed discovery out of proportion. The only support this claim has, is a unconfirmed report for a university professor who states that its "warrants further investigation"

I will wait for further investigation before i get overly excited.

I've always believed this. This planet has been here for 6 billion years. If our current modern civilization started 100,000 ago and went from stone age to cloning and space travel then there is a long period of time before where this could have happened over and over again.
How can you believe science for ever? We keep updating it and changing the text books every 50 years.
What we think we really know is only temporary until they tell us what we know now.
But it's still "the law of science" or a working theory that we are forced to study and absorb as fact (even though it is temporary)

reply to post by MDDoxs


True.

As I've stated in the OP. I can't speak for the veracity of the claim but if true it's a game changer.

A good find....but this information has been around for a few years.....

news.bbc.co.uk...

Seriously, we have NO clue how we came to be on this Planet.
It is all supposition and guess work.....

The out of Africa theory is just that...a theory.

If Africa is the mother of primates....can someone please explain why the Orangatang live 10,000 miles away and is not related to African primates?....and why 15' tall Gigantopithicus Apes have been found in Asia, but not Africa??

The Australian aboriginie is the missing link, they are not African, in fact they have more in common with ancient Europeans than Africans........Current African Negro tribes are relatively recent in the development of man.

The Australian continent people look, act and are basically the same, as in the past 100,000 years...they rarely breed outside their gene pool, other than minor northern mixes with Indonesia/Chinese maybe Maori.

Unfortunately..this "Man" thing is too sensitive to the "Establishment", for them to accept an alternative view.

Originally posted by TimesUp
I've always believed this. This planet has been here for 6 billion years. If our current modern civilization started 100,000 ago and went from stone age to cloning and space travel then there is a long period of time before where this could have happened over and over again.
How can you believe science for ever? We keep updating it and changing the text books every 50 years.
What we think we really know is only temporary until they tell us what we know now.
But it's still "the law of science" or a working theory that we are forced to study and absorb as fact (even though it is temporary)

current "modern" civilization, eg the advent of agrarian society and city building is accepted to have begun between 15000 - 10000 bce
which makes it even more impressive how far we have come.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Should we let this possible find be dismissed?

As if we actually have a choice in the matter...

Unless this discovery somehow supports the agenda, it is "history".

There have been plenty of instances over time where giant skulls, skeletons and giant artifacts have been found all around the world. Of course you don't hear about it at college, university or from the mainstream news, as it's covered up so well, it's as if it never existed or it will be called a hoax and some bull story will be cooked up and the people will believe it.

LINK

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

Topper

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.

Originally posted by gort51
A good find....but this information has been around for a few years.....

news.bbc.co.uk...

Seriously, we have NO clue how we came to be on this Planet.
It is all supposition and guess work.....

The out of Africa theory is just that...a theory.

If Africa is the mother of primates....can someone please explain why the Orangatang live 10,000 miles away and is not related to African primates?....and why 15' tall Gigantopithicus Apes have been found in Asia, but not Africa??

The Australian aboriginie is the missing link, they are not African, in fact they have more in common with ancient Europeans than Africans........Current African Negro tribes are relatively recent in the development of man.

The Australian continent people look, act and are basically the same, as in the past 100,000 years...they rarely breed outside their gene pool, other than minor northern mixes with Indonesia/Chinese maybe Maori.

Unfortunately..this "Man" thing is too sensitive to the "Establishment", for them to accept an alternative view.

mitochondrial DNA tracking suggests that aborginies came here about 40-50000 years ago, by foot.

from india

www.abc.net.au...

I wouldn't be surprised to see this find ratified/confirmed in academic circles.
I also wouldn't be surprised to see status quo dismiss the claim, leaving a potentially important find to fallow, and potential future tampering/destruction.

Side note: I'm always amused when discussing Paleolithic eras in terms of "technology".

Regarding this claim, in observation of accepted historical paradigm, people are like sand on a beach.
Go to the beach and sand gets everywhere, and often in the most curious places.
People, I think, are like such beach sand and have proven quite diligent in finding themselves in the most curious of places.
Easter Island? Hawaiian Islands?
It's not too far a stretch, leap, walk across a land bridge, or boat ride to consider people may very well have found themselves in the Americas several times over, at differing points in the past to differing successes, just as we find certain tools like the sword, the bow and arrow, the wheel, and other such independently developed all over the globe by divergent geologically separate cultures.

The Americas have already been historically "discovered" by indigenous cultures, the vikings, and also old Columbus.
There's evidence of Sanscrit and proto-semetic writing found on some artifacts in S. America (Fuente Magna Bowl), as well as Roman Amphora, and additional speculation regarding traces of Coca and Nicotine found in Egyptian mummies.
Pre-Columbian Contact hypothesis

The Americas may very well have been settled, if only be a small group that eventually died out, well before accepted paradigm.

Originally posted by okamitengu

Originally posted by TimesUp
I've always believed this. This planet has been here for 6 billion years. If our current modern civilization started 100,000 ago and went from stone age to cloning and space travel then there is a long period of time before where this could have happened over and over again.
How can you believe science for ever? We keep updating it and changing the text books every 50 years.
What we think we really know is only temporary until they tell us what we know now.
But it's still "the law of science" or a working theory that we are forced to study and absorb as fact (even though it is temporary)

current "modern" civilization, eg the advent of agrarian society and city building is accepted to have begun between 15000 - 10000 bce
which makes it even more impressive how far we have come.

True, but it takes a while before things really take off.
Of course we at one point where probably helped by our ancient earth ancestors who have come back to earth to guide us. You know, we call them "aliens"

What crazy personal timing for me.
I literally just finished reading all of your Ancient Civilization threads.
I read them over the last few days. Amazing by the way.
The best stuff I read to date on the subject.
And although I know you are not a fan,
I do find Graham Hancock's ideas intriguing.
But as I said yours was the best I've read so far.

Anyway wow wow wow if true.
What will they do? How will they accept it?
America, ice ages and all, has always seemed strangely barren
of anything Human. Maybe it wasn't .

reply to post by sealing


Thank you, I appreciate the feedback.

Here is one you may not have read yet.

Enjoy

Ancient America Rocked!,

Many people have agreed and then dismissed the theory of human migration down into the Americas from the Bering Straight Land/Ice Bridge. Might this possibly bring more proof as to those claims?

Good Stuff Slayer.

Peace

I believe that it's possible that these findings could support the theory that the different races originated at different places in the world. This in turn would render the out of Africa theory null and void. I for one don't believe in the OOA theory and correct me if I'm wrong but many Chinese scientists don't believe in it either.

Either way, there is knowledge that is known to a few and is being suppressed for one reason or another.

Originally posted by kimish
I believe that it's possible that these findings could support the theory that the different races originated at different places in the world. This in turn would render the out of Africa theory null and void. I for one don't believe in the OOA theory and correct me if I'm wrong but many Chinese scientists don't believe in it either.

Either way, there is knowledge that is known to a few and is being suppressed for one reason or another.

How would you explain that we all originated at different places? I've never heard of that theory.

Curious.

Peace

reply to post by jude11


I think there were migration across the land bridge. But, Was it the first time? Was it the only time? Europeans it appears also came across an ice bridge of sorts during the last ice age. Was that their first time across as well?


Also could earlier hominids have done it at a much earlier period?

reply to post by SLAYER69


Here is a link to a recent find in Idaho that is believed to be pre Clovis around 14,300 years ago. Check it out.
Linky