The first Americans: Clues to an ancient migration
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 เม.ย. 2017
- An archaeological site in California may have opened up a whole new chapter in the history of humans in the Americas. Researchers claim the site shows evidence of humans interacting with the bones of a mastodon, an ice age relative of elephants and mammoths. New dating suggests the site may be 130,000 years old - 100,000 years earlier than the accepted date for the first human colonisation of the Americas.
Read the paper here: nature.com/articles/doi:10.103...
And a News & Views article here: www.nature.com/nature/journal/...
26th April 2017 - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[EP.01] ดูฟรึตอนแรก LOL: Last One Laughing Thailand Thailand หัวเราะทีหลังปังกว่า | Prime Thailand](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/t4KunBRKn3s/mqdefault.jpg)
Will miss my father Richard he passed away this week
Condolences.
Thankyou
My condolences he made an amazing contribution to archaeology and what it is today you should be so proud of him!!! May his memory be a blessing to you for all times
We will *always* make new discoveries in literally every field of research.
So why do people continue to make so many assumptions about such things being _"implausible"_ when it is just *an incredibly simple fact that we do not already know everything* that happened? Especially when pertaining to _"the first"_ of anything.
And just as many discoveries are made that contradict other discoveries. The most recent contradiction always wins and gets published until...
We are going on cover the lies as time goes on.
Because the evidence presented here is closer to lack of evidence...
People make assumptions about the improbability of "humans" existing in the Americas 130,000 years ago based on the known hominids alive around that time. They would probably not have the knowledge to build boats of any destination so a sea voyage from Africa is out of the question. Currently no truly ancient hominid fossils have been found in the Americas dating from that time.
Evidence is what is lacking. Knapped tools would be a fantastic start.
Try to explain that to the average American, where if it's not in the bible, it's not possible. With every new discovery on human origins comes the familiar chant: "The science must be wrong," or the speed of light has not always been a constant, which proves the earth is only ~6,000 years old! Go ahead, try.
In Serra da Capivara National Park, Piaui, Brazil - there are cave paintings and fire pits that they claim could go back as far as 100,000 years ago. Brazil faces the Atlantic, not the Pacific, and Serra da Capivara is at least 500km from the ocean in the middle of a hot, dry, desert like environment. Where did these people come from? Hopefully, this find in North America will shed some light on the find in South America. Interesting that both sites are throwing around the 100,000 years number. We must unlearn what we have learned.
In Brazil there are sites dated as far as 60k years old.
They are known since the 70's.
The clovis culture migration is probably the most proeminent source of the native american genetic pool, but it doesn't excludes a previous human occupation of the americas coming from africa, or even polinesia.
In conclusion, the beringer migration is a huge part of the history, but it probably isn't the whole history.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedra_Furada
What sites are you referring to? A woman's skeleton named Luzia, was discovered in 1974 and dated at ~10,030. She is considered to be the most ancient hominid discovered in S. America.
I thought archaeology has already discovered that the First People's didn't just cross the Bering Strait but came way earlier by boat along the western coast of the Americas. Archaeology erroneously thought the First People came to the Americas looking for game and so they went inland, when, in fact, they came to the Americas along the coasts where there was bounty of food in the ocean for them to survive. Archaeology has spent years looking inland when they should be looking at the Indian sites along the coast which are much older.
The kelp highway probably starts in Beringia (especially if you consider the Aleutian Islands part of Beringia). Archaelogists have looked along the coasts quite a bit. There is an amazing site on Calvert Island, BC that has 14,000 year old footprints. It supports the kelp highway concept, which i also find to be attractive.
The inland route was also open for long periods of time before the last glacial maximum, so people could have gone both ways.
McNabb disproves one theory because of plate tectonics but that also shortens the Atlantic gap. The eastern corridor has been crossed before, and Beringia wasn’t the only route into the Americas.
THIS is news. THIS is what I want to hear about for an hour every evening after work. One day they'll get it...
THANK YOU for adding a skeptical opinion
Most articles and documentaries must be like this, with people arguing why studies/pappers/etc BOTH can AND can't be
and JUST WHO was the VIDEO EDITOR(s) that put this piece together?
Likely a number of folks landed on our coasts way earlier.
Question is which ones stuck.
Solutrean technology does appear to be where Clovis came from but DNA is sketchy at best.
So their technology outlasted them.
Stanford also suggested that solutrean culture might well be north african.
That would be interesting....
In your expirement breaking bare elephant bones with a stone ax, do you repeat it on an intact limbs with muscles, tendons, etc. to compare that to raw bone fracture patterns?
Don't blame skeptisisn... that date would be a radical departure..but strange things do happen...Have often wondered about possible very small migrations that arrived (how is the problem) and due to conditions remained a very small group that eventually died out..this might explain the scarcity of sites..
I don't know if that idea is feasible but I have wondered about it.. I'm sure I'm not the only one..
Interesting! Keep working!
Cool I’ll keep an open mind wait for more info.
so if your asking which humans came over, are you suggesting the native Americans may not have been from homo sapien sapien?
this is not the first site showing hundreds of thousands of years of occupation. scientists have careers ruined by people with closed minds. these guys are brave to bring this out! bravo!
Keep in mind that coming here 130,000 years ago didn't necessarily mean that a viable human population was established that lasted until the more established dates. They might have come here in such small numbers that they died out after a few generations. That would certainly explain why this find is so unusual.
On the other hand, there is the 'four-minute mile' phenomena. For years, runners tried to run a mile in under four minutes. But after someone did it for the first time, doing so became relatively routine. They'd been held back by a mental block not a physical one. This discovery could lead a lot of other archaeologists to start seeing what they've not been seeing, more evidence that humans were living here over 100,000 years ago.
The key will lie in finding human bones this old. And if these human populations were small, that may not be easy.
The DNA is so fragile. I mean Denisovans were discovered a few years ago. It does not necessarily mean they were rare as a species at all.
These archaic archeologists believe all humans came from Africa. How did this happen? If it happened in Africa it is likely it happened in the America's as well. I believe my ancestors the more I hear and read archeologists who will not accept any other possibility.
How did what happen exactly? They don't have any evidence?...
Fascinating stuff. Would be very helpful to know who these people are, though? The sceptical British man, who is he? I think he talks a lot of sense here, but I really want to know his expertise. Did they just happen to find him walking past or is he a big deal in paleo circles?
McNabb is an expert on early stone tools and cognition from the span of about 2.6 million years to 40 thousand years ago. He's right on a lot of points about finding other things associated with butchery sites that aren't present here.
Irreverent Ideas Thanks!
Watching again, it does give his name, but only about two minutes in, despite him being the first face at the beginning of this five minute film.
That's some maverick documentary-making there.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU? YOU MEAN YOU HAVEN’T BEEN HONEST .
Are they related to luzia ?
Hahaha! Good one. You know who they are just like the rest of these foreigners ESPECIALLY the original 'dark-skinned' Europeans.
The so called black people today the scientist been trying to carbon date our origin on this planet back millions of years and still don’t know
My recent find puts the first civilizations on the Farallon Plate over 3 million years ago.
Here's the real question. Why does everyone assume that the first humans here had to have migrated from somewhere else? After the discovery of Clovis points and Clovis sites we searched for over a century. Does anyone know what we thought we might find? I can tell you if archaeological interests were the same as they are now then we have simply overlooked the obvious. What I mean by this is, if a stone does not have the guaranty of repetitive pressure flaking along an edge made of flint, chert, jasper or obsidian it is immediately dismissed. There are thousands of oldowan stone tools present which are all labeled "naturally occurring" merely because they can't define their purpose. I have been studying these stone tools for well over a year and released a video titled "Paleoindian stone tool functionality", recently. The title was a bit hasty as I realize most of these stone tools are Pre-Clovis. I am releasing another video this week called "Oldawon stone tools of Kansas". In this video I will discuss wear analysis which supports my theories on usage of the tools from the first video as well as taking a look at some larger stone tools. Many of these larger tools have been shaped by grinding as well as percussion strikes. My study is based on hundreds of stone tools which I have collected from two small sites with large concentrations of them in an area otherwise void of hard stone.
Wood rots quickly. Were the boats used around the world by the ancients made of something that would persist in the archaeological record the way stone and bone do, perhaps that whole Beringia land bridge story would never have come about.
I thought there was mastadons 11k years ago?
Lots of circumstantial evidence. You can assume only humans brought in a rock to a silt site, but as the speaker said, "...there are hundreds of possibilities." That said, as an archeologist, I'm quite positive human existence in the Western Hemisphere is way beyond the usual 14 or 15k years the archeological establishment has claimed forever. Paradigms in archeology, mainly controlled by academic archeologists, are strongly protected, and resistance to outlier data is strong. I've run across many reports of sites with 30k, 40k 60k dating ages reported, but these never reach mainstream journals, but are often relegated to the "forbidden archeology" realm. Only recently has mainstream archeology admitted and accepted data for say, early (say 1000AD-ish) Scandinavian existence in North America. They lived in Greenland for sure, but final acceptance that they reached other parts of this part of the world is usually accepted, but very reluctantly. Tales of Phoenicians, Assyrians, Roman or other groups reaching North America is still in the forbidden archeology realm, though artifacts have been reported...usually dismissed as being "salted" or "planted" at their site of discovery. A Han Dynasty boat was excavated years ago on the Sacramento River in CA, but the implication that China reached North America thousands of years ago is still avoided in academia...then there are all the Chinese type of stone anchors reported all along the West Coast of the Americas but never getting beyond the "forbidden archeology" discussions. And reports from the Lewis and Clark expedition along the Missouri River, reporting blond haired and blue eyed Indian groups with unique languages at least imply early migrations from Europe during the long long recent Ice Age. Suggestions that humans from Europe crossed the southern extent of the Atlantic Ice Sheet following animals doing the same, has even popped up in some mainstream discussions. Not an impossible scenario; if humans could cross the Bering Land Bridge, they could cross the Atlantic Ice Bridge. Man likely reached the Western Hemisphere many hundreds of thousands of years ago, but even with more physical proof being someday found, resistance to acceptance will be strong.
And that is the beauty of science! No one is stating as FACT that is was humans but only proposing that it is a possibility. Now older sites 30-100 yrs we may look harder for traces of human activity when we thought that was not a possibility. Still a long shot but this is how good science works.
As an archaeologist what papers have you had published. I'd like to read more.
I'm completely unaware of archeological facts! So forgive me for my ignorance. But why do you say 14-15 thousand years when in the video they use the figure "23 thousand years ago or less?"
Regardless of the dates, your point is really damn interesting :-)
Arrival dates vary. Archeologists keep finding "older" dated sites, but not all agree. Like I said above, paradigms are slow to change. The 14-15k date is ballpark. For decades, the teaching was that man came to the Americas towards the end of that last glacial period. Several sites have been dated at around 12k+, even in the mid-west, and for a long time these were labelled the "earliest known" sites. In more recent years that I am aware of, earlier site dates have been found, some into the 40k BP range, but these are often with a caveat that "more data is needed", because "unlikely" more than 20k or so max is still hanging in there as the dominant paradigm. I've been out of the field directly for a about 20yrs, and certainly there are "older sites" that have been found. But as for a change in the academic paradigm of "man has not been here that long", it is still dominant. If you delve into the "forbidden archeology" realm, you will find lots of nonsense and crazy theories, but some of what is found is likely real, just not proven well enough to the paradigm owners to become part of a New Paradigm. Time will tell.
I was not an academic archeologist, but a field archeologist, working mainly on contracts, monitoring, survey, etc. I only have a few project reports as author or co-author or mentioned as doing the fieldwork. Never much into academics, I liked being out in the trenches, so to say.
I´m in doubt, i don´t know why the video is called 'clues of an ancient migration'. I thought migration was the movements species perform showing time and space patterns, for example, the migration of birds that goes with their anual cycle. Or am I wrong? What do you think?
couldnt the mammoth have been smashed to pieces by some kind of natural disaster like an earthquake or something like taht ?????
or maybe it was giants ...;)
take everything archeologist with a grain of salt
But does this date to before or after Lavos's arrival on earth?
There are modern birds which smash bones with massive rocks they throw on them from high up. Couldn't that also be one explanation?
They are Egyptian Vultures and they drop bones, not rocks, from high altitudes on rocky cliffs to break them up in order to swallow them and the marrow within them.
I guarantee you there's no bird that can pick up a 20lbs rock alive today, or 130,000ya.
Whelp theres only one way to find out, lemme' jump into my time machine.
Angelo C mind the butterflies
Hey hi to my Great Great Great great...............................Great Grand Pappy for me. Oh also tell him he forgot the Formula for Gunpowder from his last visit
Thank you for showing science at work!
This is strange. What could be my best hypothesis to explain this? Hmm, let's ask someone who should know if it could be right. They say we need more, but what you have here is interesting enough to persue your hpyothesis.
Now let's both try and proof or disproof this hypothesis!
Both: Yay!
And go to work.
THAT is how science works. Idea → proof/disproven → theory (ready to get disproven at any time or get exchanged with more probably theory)
That experiment they did, with the bone breaking was kinda bunk. they need to blind that. they need to look at the break patterns without knowing how they were broken and then test them.
An sure that not going to be the last experiment
also that was an old elephant bone, not a fresh mastodon one.
@@ktiemz Why do you say it was an old bone?
If this finding holds, it will be HUGE! Potentially the biggest discovery in North American archaeological history.
It will be YUUUGE
What about the pyramids found in the ocean between Mexico and Cuba?
All the megalithic ruins and pyramids being found in Bosnia, Indonesia, and china and even more around the world. the history of humans we learned from the school books is so wrong and the mainstream science and archeological are covering it up or completely ignoring it because they don't have the answers.
Or, they do have the answer, and it threatens their career and reputation. These so called scientists are so far up their ass, that any evidence threatening their previous or current work automatically cant be true, only when it benefits their ideas and beliefs and of course their pockets.
It seems to me, when Native Americans 1st came across the Bering Strait, they saw the remnants of Homo Erectus, or maybe Neandertal, and this is where the legend of Bigfoot began.
Even Reed Richards would be impressed by that reach.
Percussion fractures on the bones are curious and interesting, and no, there aren't "a
hundred different ways that can occur." At least not plausible ones. But there are several, and one might be stomping. I'm going to look into male elephant behavior. Do alpha males perhaps do a victory stomp on the bodies of slain adversaries? Several tons of angry elephant could certainly produce blunt force fracturing of even the thickest of bones.
As for the stones that may be in association, the team needs to produce a local geology
survey and report to try and determine their origin. Is the outcrop or deposit they
came from far away ? While even large rocks can move great distances over time, it is
unlikely humans lugged such heavy stones around over those distances. They weren't
stupid, they invariably used what was nearby or on hand.
Robert Dunn, Archaeologist
I'd bet CSI types could tell you whether the bones were dry or fresh when they broke.
At least one of the shattered bones looked to be in situ, in it's original, un-pried apart for the marrow shape. That one bone makes me skeptical, but IDK if that's really how they found it, or if I'm remembering it right (40 seconds ago lol).
Actual custom crafted spear head and stone necklaces of something similar in looks
I have mountains of possible evidence documented to support my findings.
Earth shattering rewriting of history if this proves to be true
Not really. It just moves the date of colonization of the Americas 100 000 years back. Not even close to 'earth shattering'.
Profezor Snayp. Nope. This would completely rewrite all the archaeological and anthropological textbooks. It has ramifications far beyond human colonization of North America, it would change our ideas of human origins (i.e. Out-of-Africa), human migration, Paleo lifeways, climate modelling, as well as our ideas of megafaunal extinctions. 130,000 years is pretty earth shattering, scientifically speaking.
_"No it doesn't. Not even in the slightest."_
Yup, it does. 130,000 years is still within the range of anatomically modern humans. And if it's not AMH, then it's a new hominid species using tools. Either scenario would be earth-shattering.
facts and repeat. That's it.
More evidence
Alexander von Wuthenau
slide a big stone down a grade and it will shear what ever it strikes ,i think you give them not enough credit for ingin nuity
4:30 Wow, this is super unimpressive. Demonstrating that it's "consistent" doesn't exclude other causes of trauma. These "archeologists" need to go back to school and get a lesson on the philosophy of science.
Are they Asians or Africans
I believe possibly Africans and possibly those genes are in a great deal of African American.
Set within treacherously steep cliffs, and hidden away in the secluded valleys of northeast Brazil, is some of South America’s most significant and spectacular rock art. Most known art comes from the archaeologically-important National Park of the Serra da Capivara in the state of Piauí, and it is causing quite a controversy. The reason for the uproar? The rock art is being dated to around 25,000 years ago, while a small number of eminent rock art specialists are proposing an even earlier date - perhaps as far back as 36,000 years ago.
Lies.
Exactly
Could it be Erectus?
not tool users possibly habilis or neander or unknown
modern human get stuff done and die very often
@@aspiringscientificjournali1505 Actually erectus did use tools. They did not however, use boats...
@@ktiemz
Valid
I was thinking more on the construction side
but yes they did use tools
@@aspiringscientificjournali1505 Okay, cool. Just wanted to make sure we're all on the same page here - couldn't NOT chime in with a user-name like yours ;) keep aspiring, cow!
this is crazy
Theodor Niculae Crazier things have been hypothesized. But it certainly is interesting.
They found pyramids in the ocean between Mexico and cuba that look aztec and believed to be 100,000 years old.
Has anybody ever visited the Early Man Calico Dig in California? I have. I would say I do not find this implausible, and more work needs to be done... With or without the permission of Siberian-immigrant settlers (aka "Native" Americans). I found it outrageous that these descendants of early settlers made a special claim on an archeological discovery of a skeleton that would have thrown doubt on their beliefs about their origins.
I don't think one skeleton would've thrown doubts about anything. Maybe if they found several hundred skeletons...
Problem with that native Americans have 1% Siberia dna, and no native American dna found past that bridge so we know Siberians came here but where did the native American dna come from?
Think of all the polynesians who didn't make it or Roanoak the Puritans who failed 🤔 there's a lot of geography just saying
Great, now We have a 115,000 year gap with no artifacts. I guess they didn't stay very long before being eaten by a bear.
Can anyone say Bigfoot?
Big! Foot! Yes this could be bigfoot, and maybe bigfoot was Denisovan or Dragon man, or possibly an even more distant relation. Nice call there.
Why must you play fake drum music; quit hard to concentrate on its substance. ;- ( )
lol
Dude, it's just 32 seconds of the intro. Why are you so frail?
Occupation of North America goes back millions of years. The problem is that they are not digging deep enough. If they start to dig deeper in the appropriate locations, like the coastal areas it will be confirmed.
The island of califa
I have the best evidence of this theory may be true. Reaching out to see if I can get help to get in touch with a person seeking such knowledge. I have documented things I think is proof.
You shouildsay in Mexico bacause The west of the U.S. is really occupied mexico. Besides the U.S. is not America.
Wrong, we all stole it from indigenous people.
Bottom line: they don't know.
If horses, camels and lamas ancestors all came from South American, then maybe humans did too. Maybe Noah built his ark in America and sailed to Mount Ararat in Armenia. Instead of migrating to America maybe we migrated from America? 😏
Lol
No, we came out of Africa
@@ktiemz
But, how do you really know?
They could be wrong....
@@Happy-uy5wc Because we have overwhelming evidence supporting the theory and zero evidence of an 'out-of-America' hypothesis.
@Jesse Marcel
The anthropologists all agree that the ancestors of horses, camels and lamas all originated from South America. You can look it up on Wikipedia. 😎👍
Only thing to do is keep digging.
Or, is was an explosion that threw large and small rocks. Meteor, volcano, electrical discharge from another planet, ...
nonsense, earth was created 6000 years ago, :wink :wink
Take up my challenge.
That statement was by some weird dude in Europe with a cool hat, not the bible
I'll chalk this one up to Forbidden archaeology, even though it might now seem hip and exiting for current scientists to accept this as fact.
Liar😑
*cough jeradites cough*
Cough He made it all up Cough
first people.
One word, Hueyatlaco. This would be old news....
Black people been here just say it
Thank you!!!! LMAO!!!!!!
He could, but then he'll offend you with the truth
Scepticism is an important part of the scientific process, unfortunately archeology is one science that seems rooted in orthodoxy where the reputations of the earlier archeologists are held in reverence and any finding that contradicts the accepted "wisdom" is treated as "heresy".
If these finds were discovered in Europe or Africa, there would be no doubt about the interpretation, why should the Americas be treated differently.
This opens the door for more research and shouldn't be ignored because it doesn't fit the accepted wisdom.
At this age: the likely suspects would either be Denisovan or Erectus; there is growing evidence from Asia that both may have had seafaring abilities even though limited to line of sight voyaging.
I hope this is just another new chapter in the constantly evolving tale of human existence.
🤔
Facts is. West Africans built pyramids, and we're 1st to travel into the Americas. The blacks had good trading relationships with Mayans Indians, Olmec 40 thousand ton carved rocks are all around Mexico. Columbus was last to try travel he landed in Haiti/ Caribbean.
Well the same West Africans destroyed what was once France's richest and most productive colony in the New World. Barely even made it to nearby islands near Africa
Over 100,000 years old? I thought it was already established that the Aborigines were here before the whats widely called the Native American? Based on that it would be safe maybe to say that the people were of African origin and skin tone. Once the moguloid began to chase game across the strait the numbers of the Aborigines began to drop. The fighting in shown on cave drawings by Aborigines in North America in the west.
@Wet Mustard that's not what the cave drawings are dated to. Would you like the video documentary?
@@onthemicwithtarencebaileys5684 No, I want a scientific peer reviewed article
@@onthemicwithtarencebaileys5684 i want evidence, not your 1st grade level imagination
Lunatic kang
fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart fart
John, like the majority of academics, is being cautious to protect his career. You can tell he is indeed intrigued at the data, I’d say he is convinced but again is playing it safe. His peers and colleagues are habitual crucifiers of those who challenge the status quo. Happens in all aspects of science. How dare anyone challenge the establishment? Here is the establishment: Wait….you built a preponderance of evidence and waited over 20 years to publish your paper? Ok, we’ll insult your intelligence and hard work by making outlandish and ridiculous comments like “the bulldozers broke the bones”. Get the “F” outta here. They’ve done the same thing to James Kennett on his work on the Clovis Comet and Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley for their Solutrean hypothesis work. They actually ignore hard factual data to support their own models. Stop being cowards, make your own opinions without being scared of ridicule, and start doing research where your instincts tell you. If they hadn’t dug deeper at Topper they wouldn’t have found a pre-Clovis site. So, it’s the folks that went against the establishment like Einstein who will be remembered when the evidence is too overwhelming to ignore. Btw, this is most likely the work of Homo Erectus that traveled across Beringia in the previous glacial maximum, in my opinion. I think way too early for Homo sapiens. Homo erectus were big travelers, already in Asia by that time. Plus, I’m sure Homo sapiens and neanderthals smashed bones for marrow, but I don’t think they had to. Why smash bones when you can hunt your prey and consume better sources of protein. This seems like a scavenging method, maybe after the mastedon was already killed and consumed by other predators. You take what’s left, smash the bones. Homo erectus.
There was no sea lane for the first humans to cross as the continents were once all connected in one super-continent called Pangea surrounded by a super-ocean called Panthalassa. many of these early humans were wiped out in the Permian extinction but enough survived to create our present civilization, which may even now be heading for another extinction.
The Permian ended 250 million years ago...
The more we think that know, the more that we prove that we know we know nothing.
Most of what we thought we knew is wrong. That's life in our small brain world.
Well we do know what wrong is so we must be doing something right.
Wrong :=)
Concerning your simple-minded one word reply, consider it wrong based on the rationale of your first comment.
Good job, you just poked your own eye, you small brained genius.
I still got my tongue in my cheek as I watch you try so hard to experience reading comprehension... Ahhh the LAMO time it tis :-) Thank you for the laughs!
What kind of brainless twit are you? Get a live. Your totally clueless... so go back under your troll rock and entertain yourself. Hiding under your new TH-cam handle as if LAMO!
I'm calling it first.This is going to be attacked heavily because ancient hominids of some sort in NA throws a massive wrench into the intersectional victimhood stack.
the first euroamericans
see the TH-cam video "Smiley face killers case solved and covered up"
Why you calling them "americans" ??? SmH
because they lived on the landmass we call America?
i'm not sure i understand your question
:O I have some bad news for you hahah
Is this where i ask for it? i'm not sure how this works.
Before you consider asking, please do your own labor.
+Mitcholos you sound very ignorant
earth=6000 or so years old.
Scoots McGoots millions?
4.543 billion years
old.
Big rock = new history? Not.