Page 15 of 102
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:38 am
Thanks guys - with this new evidence from the Hueyeltaco site, I'm trying to understand as much as I can.
Best regards to you all who are actually out there "on the ground" doing the work while we argue about here in the forum.
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:53 am
Can't work out how to copy the image.
Anyway, those two jpegs (20634 and 20635) I have to say to me it looks like the case that those relatively flat and smooth surfaces would not be in quite such good shape if the whole thing had been produced by natural forces. If it were just down to wear and tear, even with a weak edge, would the flaking be so pronounced? I'm starting to think you might be onto something. [/img]
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:52 am
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:35 am
Can't work out how to copy the image.
Right click on the picture you wish to copy.
Highlight and Copy the entire URL.
Click on the reply button.
Click on the Img button
Paste the url you highlighted, above, behind the [IMG]
Hit Img again to close the selection.
Voila. Hit Submit.
It should look like this [img]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx[/img]
with your string substituted for the x's.
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:30 am
Let's try this...
Bloody hell! It worked.
Thanks for the tutorial.
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:29 pm
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:39 pm
I frequently find that I create monsters with those instructions.
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:49 pm
Charlie, it could be a core from which large flakes were taken to make tools, but I do no believe that it is a tool itself. Maybe discarded material. The deep round flakes taken from the edge are too deep and round and take off too much of the edge. If it was worked to use as a tool it was discarded after the big gaps in the edge were made as they were no good for making it sharp. I don't use all the big knapping terms because I don't know them. No flint knapper would make such chips on purpose. The big one you said goes all the way across could have been used, I mean the missing flake itself. It is also possible that it all occured naturally. That's my bet. The fact that you found them in association with other obviously worked tools does make them suspect, however. But remember, "there are no hand axes in the new world". LOL (I don't buy that at all) They just don't look like tools to me, just debitage. Touched by man, though. Try an experiment. Get some cobbles of similar material and throw them down on other rocks and watch what happens. If you do it enough you'll come up with a few that look like tools. Nature can do this randomly sometimes. I'm just trying to keep you from burying your house in useless rocks. Keep the definite tools and chunk the rest. It seems that there is plenty available without collecting every possible "iffy" rock you find. (Kinda like ignoring that San Diego "kill" site and concentrating on sites with definite evidence). You end up getting buried in bullshit if everything you see looks like an artifact. The real ones get lost amongst the crap.
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:02 pm
If you do it enough you'll come up with a few that look like tools.
The trouble with that is that I can see nature "dropping" a stone "once," not repeatedly.
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:03 pm
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:04 pm
Yes but nature drops millions of stones. If one in a thousand breaks then you could get a few just by chance that look like tools. It's not only possible, but probable that this does happen sometimes.
Another "Rock" to Yank Frank's Chain :)
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:21 pm
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:34 pm
Oldowan Type Butchering Tool
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:00 pm
Posted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:14 pm
OK, Beags. See the percussion ripples in Charlie's example? And you thought I was crazy.
BTW, I'm not crazy ... I'm deranged (that's more upscale).