More pre Clovis

The Western Hemisphere. General term for the Americas following their discovery by Europeans, thus setting them in contradistinction to the Old World of Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

More pre Clovis

Postby circumspice » Wed Apr 30, 2014 10:30 pm

This article is about 6 months old. I wonder if there is any followup on it? (this is in Uruguay)

http://m.phys.org/news/2013-11-ancient- ... umans.html
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby kbs2244 » Thu May 01, 2014 11:12 am

I would doubt it from a US source.
kbs2244
 
Posts: 2464
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:47 pm

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby shawomet » Fri May 02, 2014 9:17 am

shawomet
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:14 am

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby circumspice » Fri May 02, 2014 6:23 pm

Thanks!
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope
User avatar
circumspice
 
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby shawomet » Sat May 03, 2014 4:15 pm

circumspice wrote:Thanks!


You're welcome. I was surprised to find that much :!:
shawomet
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:14 am

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby Frank Harrist » Sun May 04, 2014 10:29 am

If mainstream archaeology has its way, you'll never hear anything else about this....at least not for many years. The old school codgers have to all die off before anything new will be accepted. I firmly believe that humans have been in this hemisphere for much, much longer than what the accepted literature states. Some may have even evolved here. Just my opinion....
Frank Harrist
 

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby shawomet » Tue May 06, 2014 4:40 am

Frank Harrist wrote:If mainstream archaeology has its way, you'll never hear anything else about this....at least not for many years. The old school codgers have to all die off before anything new will be accepted. I firmly believe that humans have been in this hemisphere for much, much longer than what the accepted literature states. Some may have even evolved here. Just my opinion....


You could say there are two mainstreams: NA and SA. The South Americans couldn't care less what our dominant NA paradigms are. Some are willing to entertain the notion that some Brazilian sites represent evidence of arrival from Africa across the Atlantic. They were never locked into Clovis-first when Clovis-first ruled the day. I do think things like the recent Paleoamerican conference in Santa Fe shows that we are at the point where NA archy's know they must accommodate the SA sites and dates to understand the arrival of humans in this hemisphere.
shawomet
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:14 am

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby E.P. Grondine » Tue May 06, 2014 8:06 am

Thank you Shawomet.

My book is "Man and Impact in the Americas", and the Americas include both North, Central, and South America.

What is more striking between the three communities of archaeologists is their differences in the use of oral materials.

The worse part is the work done on the Shawnee in Ohio.
It is truly truly crappy.
E.P. Grondine
 

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby Frank Harrist » Tue May 06, 2014 11:05 am

shawomet wrote:
Frank Harrist wrote:If mainstream archaeology has its way, you'll never hear anything else about this....at least not for many years. The old school codgers have to all die off before anything new will be accepted. I firmly believe that humans have been in this hemisphere for much, much longer than what the accepted literature states. Some may have even evolved here. Just my opinion....


You could say there are two mainstreams: NA and SA. The South Americans couldn't care less what our dominant NA paradigms are. Some are willing to entertain the notion that some Brazilian sites represent evidence of arrival from Africa across the Atlantic. They were never locked into Clovis-first when Clovis-first ruled the day. I do think things like the recent Paleoamerican conference in Santa Fe shows that we are at the point where NA archy's know they must accommodate the SA sites and dates to understand the arrival of humans in this hemisphere.


I hope you're right. Living in NA we still may not hear about it even if it's accepted by the rest of the world. Our mainstream media is a propaganda machine and they only tell us what the government lets them. I don't know why they wouldn't want us to know this, but who can guess what's in the minds of those idiots?
Frank Harrist
 

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby Cognito » Wed May 07, 2014 6:36 am

Our mainstream media is a propaganda machine and they only tell us what the government lets them.

Frank, a propaganda machine in the land of the free? Tell me it isn't so! :roll:

Every foreigner I've met understands your comment and most often the only
manner in which to obtain reliable news is to acquire it from outside the U.S.
Our news is biased ... I'm not sure whether its government, or just stupidity.
Natural selection favors the paranoid
User avatar
Cognito
 
Posts: 1601
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:37 am
Location: Southern California

Re: More pre Clovis

Postby shawomet » Thu May 08, 2014 4:00 pm

I just remembered this NY Times article from late March. It's the video link that was very illuminating in showing just how far outside the Clovis-first world view some archaeologists in SA have been all along.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world ... ience&_r=0
shawomet
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:14 am


Return to New World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest