Site in San Diego bones of humans 130,000 years old

[Rocky_Shorz]

I'm going to have to drop by this site to check it out.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3dro3bhS_8

[Helene West]

I listened but didn't get how they came to the conclusion of 130,000 years? carbon dating? how did they get that timeline? If they can now date going back that far I wonder why there is so much controversy about the Shroud of Turin which isn't anywhere near 130,000 yrs. I realize it's different material to work with but both still organic.

[Hervé]

Study suggests humans were in North America 100,000 years earlier than previously believed (http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/humans-north-america-130000-1.4086109)

Nicole Mortillaro CBC (http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/humans-north-america-130000-1.4086109)
Sun, 30 Apr 2017 18:00 UTC


https://www.sott.net/image/s19/393107/large/mastadon_and_humans_north_amer.jpg (https://www.sott.net/image/s19/393107/full/mastadon_and_humans_north_amer.jpg)


A team of scientists believe they have found evidence of human activity in North America that dates back 130,000 years — more than 100,000 years earlier than believed.

The evidence comes from an archeological site in San Diego County, Calif. In 1992, a site was uncovered containing mastodon bones, along with stone anvils and hammerstones. Dating the tools proved to be challenging. However, using recent technology, including uranium dating, the team believes they have firm evidence that humans were using tools to break apart the bones and make other tools.

"When you look at the evidence — the material, the nature of the wear pattern on the bones, the actual mapping of the site — the evidence is absolutely incontrovertible," Richard Fullagar, co-author of the paper (https://www.nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/nature22065) that appeared in Nature said during a teleconference.

The find is controversial, as there has been a consensus among paleontologists and anthropologists that humans made the journey to North America roughly 15,000 years ago.

Supporting evidence
The bones of the mastodon were arranged at the site — known as the Cerutti Mastodon site — in such a way that suggests it wasn't done naturally. It's not believed that the humans killed the animal, however. Instead, it's likely they were breaking up the limb bones, removing parts of the bones and probably making tools with them. They also may have extracted marrow from the bones for nutrition.

The bones also displayed spiral fractures, which suggests that they were broken while fresh and not some years later. Five large hammerstones and anvils also show wear and tear that didn't occur through geological processes, the researchers said.


https://www.sott.net/image/s19/393109/medium/mastadon_bones_humans.jpg (https://www.sott.net/image/s19/393109/full/mastadon_bones_humans.jpg)
A view of a spirally fractured mastodon femur bone. (Tom Deméré/San Diego Natural History Museum)


"What's truly remarkable about this site is that you can actually identify a particular hammer that was smacked on a particular anvil in a bunch of broken bones, and fragments of those hammers and anvils that can be refitted to the stones. It's very rare that you get that whole package together in one site," Fullagar said. "So the evidence at this site is truly remarkable and really does demonstrate human interference."

In order to replicate the types of fractures, the scientists used similar tools on elephant bones, which resulted in the same spirals.

Steve Holen, from the Center for American Paleolithic Research and a co-author, said that the breaking of the bones wasn't done by carnivore chewing or animals trampling on the bones.

"When we eliminate all the other natural processes and we can reproduce this experiment, we have very strong evidence," he said.

Skeptics challenged
The findings challenge current evidence that suggests humans arrived in North America about 15,000 years ago and will most certainly be carefully scrutinized, something the authors are well aware of. During their press conference on Tuesday, they invited other researchers to examine the evidence, some of which will be on display at the San Diego Natural History Museum next week.

"I know people will be skeptical of this because this is so surprising," Holen said. "I was skeptical when I first looked at the material myself, but it's definitely an archeological site."

Ariane Burke, an anthropology professor at the University of Montreal, said that she'd like to see more analysis of the bones and tools before concluding that humans were indeed here so long ago.

"Normally at an archeological site you find chipped stone tools, irrespective of what they're doing at the site. People are notorious litterbugs, even back then," she told CBC News. "So you kind of expect to see some of that trace of a human presence. I'm not saying they're absolutely wrong and it cannot be a human site, but I'd say the jury's still out. There's still some information missing."


https://www.sott.net/image/s19/393110/medium/humans_mastadon_hammerstone.jpg (https://www.sott.net/image/s19/393110/full/humans_mastadon_hammerstone.jpg)
A boulder discovered at the Cerutti Mastodon site thought to have been used by early humans as a hammerstone. (Tom Deméré/San Diego Natural History Museum)


A boulder discovered at the Cerutti Mastodon site thought to have been used by early humans as a hammerstone. (Tom Deméré/San Diego Natural History Museum)

Burke said that she'd specifically like to see a closer examination of the surface damage of the bones. She's particularly puzzled by the lack of cut marks, but says theycould be obscured by the surface damage.

As for whether or not the bones could have been broken by heavy machines or vehicles, the authors are adamant that that's not the case.

The researchers are confident that under careful examination, other scientists will come to the same conclusions.

"If they look carefully at this paper, that's been through rigorous peer review that Nature insists for their publication, if people honestly look at the data ... and have questions they want to pose, we are open for this sort of scholarly assessment of our work," said Thomas Demere, curator of paleontology at the San Diego Natural History Museum.

"And people are welcome to come to the museum to examine these specimens for themselves."


HyfSsgCrjb0

[Orph]

I'm going to have to drop by this site to check it out.

The site no longer exists, as that was back in the early '90s when they expanded the South Bay Freeway. Unless you meant to stop by the museum.

[ghostrider]

Science is truth, though always evolving as they discover the unknown, facts are still facts ... bones do not lie, DNA is DNA, no matter what the actual age of the bones they tell a much older history of mankind than the one we are sold by the controllers...

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Bones do not lie and DNA does not lie I agree, but sometimes faulty science can, as carbon-dating methods are not always 100% reliable. That said, 130,000yrs is certainly no stretch for me. As far as the *complete* Human story of life on Earth is concerned, that is relatively recent.

It is also by no means the first find presenting evidence of human activity on the North American continent pre-dating 15,000 years. Bones, flint arrow heads, and paleoliths of far greater antiquity than 15,000 yrs have all been found before, in some digs dating back to the 19th century even. The 'establishment' have a history of successfully debunking these and explaining them away. And not just the American finds, but those worldwide that did not fit the evolutionary picture.

The true picture, in my opinion, is very different to that one-dimensional and deeply truncated mainstream picture.

[Cardillac]

do read the monumental Michael Cremo/Richard Thompson opus "Forbidden Archeology"; we homo sapiens sapiens have been on this planet loooong before 130,000 yrs.!!!

be well all-

Larry