20:24 "Aboriginals could have come into contact with Denisovans, Neanderthals or the Hobbit (Homo Floriensis)" We know for a fact that Aboriginals came into "contact" with Denisovans, because Aboriginals have a high percentage of Denisovan DNA, 5 - 10% Have you seen the "Monash University” Sahultime work ? You didn't mention it in the video.
I was the archaeologist who discovered and first excavated the site of Madjedbebe in 1973 (at thst time the field code for the shelter site was Malakunanja II). I radiocarbon-dated the evidence of human occupation in the shelter as probably older than 18,000 yeas ago. Since then, the site has been re-excavated twice and is now claimed to be the oldest Aboriginal site in Australia. I do not agree at all with the most recent dating of the site. There is evidence of termite bioturbation of the sand layer. It it is the sand grains that have been dated, not the stone artefacts. In a sand body the stone artefacts tend to move downward over thousands of years due to invertebrate bioturbation and other agencies of sand grain disturbance, such as reptile burrowing and tree roots (yes, even today trees grow into the sediment within the shelter). Even though the claim for 65,000 years has been seriously challenged in by eminent archaeologists and dating experts publishing in professional journalists no one is listening, least of all the popular media.
Nice to get something "from the horse's mouth". Sadly the media are after circulation and so instinctively tend to gravitate towards the more extreme and sensational options available. And that is BEFORE the headline writers get their hands on a story. Thanks for your literally ground breaking work.
While I like your contribution, to try and keep researchers honest, it is also easy to get the impression of a bit of sour grapes towards people who have taken your great finds further.
I've heard the termite objection before, and I'm not particularly well read - it may even be on Wikipedia. So some of us are listening! The 65.000 year claim never really made sense to me - H.sapiens had barely left Africa. I get that some people are very motivated to establish extreme antiquity for indigenous Australians (and I've learned to just let that pass like a mythological story) but they'll be calling them H.erectus if they push it back much further.
From what I've read, most archeologists agree that the site was first occupied by humans at least 50,000 years ago, but there is some debate about it being 65,000 years ago. How is it that you are saying 18,000 and so many are saying at least 50,000?
200 kilograms mate, and almost 8ft tall. (The reconstruction at Naracoorte Fossil Centre is amazing 👍) Big Reds top out about 6'6" which is still terrifying.
They certainly are! Some of our Wedgies are close to the size of Condors too. I think it's the food source, the irrigation of the land and the massive truck road kills that provide all the food so they really don't have to work hard.
Silly monkey, waves are for erectoids, get back up here! Find the old rivers and underwater caves... find the polar trek routes... 1.5 million years is a long time for a bunch of horny hominids going out for snacks to find some others who might be doin' t'same ol' thang!
Yup, my family came over on the first settlers boat and ended up in Adelaide. I mean if we just stole a loaf of bread, apple, coal or an onion - free trip to Australia!
@@Bob-Jenkins not in south Australia mate, we paid our way here and bought land, was the only Free settlement, All other states started with convicts. So your family didnt come to South Australia with the first fleet. On 15 August 1834, the British Parliament passed the South Australia Act 1834 (Foundation Act), which empowered His Majesty to erect and establish a province or provinces in southern Australia. The act stated that the land between 132° and 141° east longitude and from 26° south latitude to the southern ocean would be allotted to the intended colony, and it would be convict-free. Seven vessels and 636 people was temporarily made at Kingscote on Kangaroo Island, until the official site of the capital was selected by William Light, where the City of Adelaide is currently located. The first immigrants arrived at Holdfast Bay (near the present day Glenelg) in November 1836.
@@bkeckk But there were Whalers and Sealers in the Victor Harbour /Cape Jervis/Kangaroo Island area before 1830.The Sea Lion Colonies got a serious workover back then. Not until the 1980's before Humpback Whales started venturing up Fleurieu Peninsula Coast again. Early Lutheran Fathers had tales told to them the Kaurna People initially thought they were there dead ancestors had come back from the other world
There’s a bit of mis-information in this video. The first people’s to migrate here were the Pigmytes who originated from what is now the Borneo region. They crossed the ice sheets several ice ages ago and settled in the highlands of northern Queensland. Later migrations saw the pygmites wiped out and disappear into history by the ‘Murrian’ aborigines. Unfortunately, the people who claim to be ‘First Nation’ are factually’Second Nation’ as they were not here first…..😂
@ Yep in an extensive study conducted by 2 Canadian PHD researchers in the 1960’s. The report was conveniently brushed under the carpet as the rather controversial Eddie Mabo negotiations were underway at the time.
G'day @ASR-1095. After a quick search, I haven't been able to find any information about the 1960's Canadian Report. Yet I know that the aboriginal people around Karanda on the Baron River near Cains have the reputation of something like a "pygmy" tribe of aboriginal people. The Karanda Public School use to have the lowest average height in Australia. Do you have any more clues to your story about this? Extra information might help sort this out. Obviously Genetic studies would be wonderful.
I live in Karratha in North Western Australia and we have rock art that has been dated back 60,000 years. We are 1000kms from the top of Australia so up there they've definitely been around alot longer than that
@@Evolve.2 that would only give a true date if the aboriginals dug the cave.what come first, man or the cave?.. Also the whole 65k year thing they push is a stretch considering we only "believe" carbon lasts 50k years.
The graphic on the thumbnail asks "How did they get There". The first human inhabitants had to reach New Guinea by watercraft of some sort. Rafts or dugout canoes most likely. One they reached New Guinea they could reach Australia by walking. The migration path assumes the events took place during the last Glacial Advance. And that enough of the current Arafura Sea and the Gulf of Carpentaria where dry land at the time. Watercraft are required to due to deep water gaps between islands that lay between Sunda Land and Sahal. One thing to note. It was never a purposeful migration with a destination in mind.
They did NOT all come down from what is now PNG when the land bridge was in place. They also arrived from Indonesia and west of where the PNG lot did. And they had NO dugout canoes until the Makassans arrived for their yearly fishing visits a few hundred years ago.
The method for getting the correct age for human habitation of the Australian continent is: ... 1. Think of a number in thousands of years... 2. double it... 3. mention a scientific paper 4. add 10,000 years 5. reference Indigenous legends of having ''always'' been in the continent 6. add another 10,000 years 7 mention another scientific paper that puts human evolution back by another 100,000 years 8. ignore evidence about the arrival of the dingo 9. ignore evidence about linguistic variation and dialectic shift 10. ignore any evidence that offers contradictions or dismissals of the number that you want to be true 11. scream ''racist''! if anyone questions your final figure.
Same with Europe, Africa, the Americas... but, with eldritch humor, the newer more inclusive models are turning out to be more accurate after the dust, so to speak, settles and the real work is engaged. Racist? No, but with our multi-sourced species mutthood, RACIALism (Neandertal, Heidelbergensis, Denisovan, Sapiens... etc) is not a horrid way to describe our origins. i mean, not that long ago a market bizarre might have held recent hybrids of the above and more... How bizarre is that?
You can also ignore any evidence and actually be a racist... I've found that people who complain about being labelled racist often have a reason they were labelled racist.
@@thesociophobe8425 Are you saying there's no smoke without fire? A commonly thrown adage, but a fallacious argument nonetheless. I gather your meaning, but my point still stands, I think. It's all too easy to throw out ''Racist!'' and get away with it. One might just as well cry ''Witch!'' Such are the times we live in... and the purity of Logic and the genius of the Scientific Method are ruined for all.
Be careful because the indigenous Australians will be claiming that next and will claim that they were first everywhere in the world, last thing you want is a welcome to country in Europe or Asia or the Americas
Many interesting facts regarding the history and research of Australia and you raise a very thought provoking notion about mass migration as a result of volcanic activity at the end of this video...great presentation. With that part of the world being dotted with thousands of islands, sand bars and shoals etc its easy to see how inviting it must have been to develop boats and rafts etc then further refine the technology as they gained more knowledge.
So where was this refined tech' when early explorers visited the top of Australia? Are you actually claiming that 60,000 years ago humans developed sea going water craft and set sail to go exploring? They did not even have dugout canoes until a few hundred years ago after the Makassans began coming here yearly for trepang etc and traded them. They most likely arrived here after tsunamis or cyclones etc washed them out to sea clinging to tree trunks or similar. Over tens of thousands of years enough would have made it here and started breeding up, and likely every couple of centuries or so a couple more arrived.
Australia was a part of Sahul, the super-continent. And in Sahul lived the much earlier human species, Denisovan. If Erectus didn't like in Sahul then maybe Denisovan were the 'first Australians.'
@@PanglossDr yeah the bin chicken bird idk the real name doesnt it migrate to aus from somewhere heaps of ancient birds would have known about aus if a human was smart enough to know a ancient bird expert maybe would figure that out cool idea its how people find water and land using birds and other animals
A good video, thank you. An observation, because there is room for the possibility. We have evidence of occupation in Australia going back about 60k years, but modern human remains 'only' going back to about 45k years. Given there is strong evidence for more than one branch of Denisovans well before 60k years in SE Asia there is room to consider H. Sapiens was not the first 'human' group to make it to Australia.
That's a great point. Species like Denisovans or Homo floresiensis could have made it to Australia first. Sounds like a great question for a future video topic!
The Kow Swamp Skulls were not gracile. Not like modern humans and had pronounced brow ridges. The first anthropologists to study those Skulls thought they were Homo Erectus. That theory doesn't sit well with todays narrative so they are now called modern human skulls.
@@Evolve.2 True, I’ve done a few random deep dives over the yrs (am admittedly lazy Re: taking notes etc lol) but there are if you dig around enough records of aborigines and early settlers referring to a pigmy race that preceded aboriginal arrival that were hunted out by them. Also plenty to indicate they were much more civilised than we’re lead to believe ie: huts, community structures etc, Do a Google/TH-cam search on the ancient grain belt that ran from east to west across the country, interesting shit!👍
Be careful about what you read or listen to, a Anthropologist from Adelaide who mapped out all of the Indigenous languages in the early 1900's, believed there were 3 waves of early visitors to Aus, also there were Africans here (Boab Trees and Bradshaw paintings),but in the 1970's the said Anthropologists work was discredited by a "selected" group so as to push a political agenda. Look up Norman Tindale's work. Fact human kidney fat was a delicacy for certain Indigenous tribes, plus tribal warfare was very common. Do your own research though but a lot of old papers/books are hard to find.
We have forgotten the last two people who were the last native people of Terr Del Feuago, at the southern tip of South America. Their DNA, was shown to be as Australian aborigionals.
An open mind is required in anthropology, Archeology as the next find can change everything previously held as truth, DNA and ghost ancestors must be taken into consideration
@infidel202 nope.... Genetic testing provides no 'pure' point of reference for Aboriginal identity, especially given the history of colonisation in Australia. Scientists cannot now recover the control data that establishes the set of Indigenous genetic traits at contact.2
@@liamgilham nope, interesting response, are you an Archeology student, there are quite a few examples of DNA related to Aboriginal Australians, Papua new Guinea Tribes, why would you assume homo erectus, Dennisovan or Floriance just a few hominids found in Indonesia, Cambodia, New Guinea ect plus the genetic evidence would after travelling across the world not visit Australia
Apparently there was a large continent of landmass that "sank " into the Pacific thousands of years ago . Elders have mentioned this and visits from Egyptian / phonecian "people" long time ago ??? "History " is exactly that HIS STORY. So much more could really be learn with open & questioning minds.........
They are Indian descent. Hundreds of different tribal groupings arrived in 3 main waves. First wave was almost wiped out by the second wave, second wave almost wiped out by the third wave. First arrival is thought to be genuinely around 3000 years ago. Lots of people say 50,000 years, but there is no evidence for this. Indonesians arrived thousands of years prior.
My theory is that all they had to do was cross the narrow Wallace line. As on one side animals in the Australian family come up to. Which shows getting to that point from Australia must have been possible. Once crossed, just walk on in from PNG. I mean if the marsupials can do it then a bipedal hominid with a big brain could. So all it takes is a good ice age and someone willing to cross about 35km of water. Or accidentally crossing it while fishing.
Mungo Man didn't just appear in Western New South Wales. He would have travelled down from the top of Australia. Considering how life it is further north it would have taken a while to get down that far. The problem with Australia is our Soils aren't good for keeping skeletons intact. Also Australia was at the start of an ice age and more land would possibly be exposed. I mentioned this because the distance would be even greater.
@@krunomrki they didn't need them/ mostly gathering food / hunting was opportunistic/ if starving they ate people/ same as caucasian people/ if you are hungry eat WEF NWO people not bug's
@@Gorloxen Please explain Egypt (bows used to hunt everything from birds to lions and elephant's) or Native Americans (buffalo hunters on the planes with bows) Bows are more accurate, shoot farther, faster and you can carry more arrows than spears. As to wood, plenty of native woods and reeds, are great to make bows and arrows (seen vids on bowers making them out of different Australian native woods, plus bundled reed bows like in PNG). They even had the fine chipped stone tool knowledge (came over with the dingo about 5000 years ago). So, what do you know about hunting or Australia again?
@@Gorloxen lets not start the fairy tale about the oldest culture on earth because it's not us. The Australian Aboriginals DNA (from across Australia) has 11% Indian DNA from no less than 5000 years ago (same time frame as dingo and small capped stone tools) we were in a constant state of intertribal warfare, you're from the east coast so cannibal practices throughout the area, are culture is different from tribe to tribe same as language. As to hunting in Australia (with bows, guns, knife and dogs) all across the outback (NT, SA, QLD, NSW) from deer, goats, kangaroo, camel and pigs and bow is so much easier, quicker and more accurate than a spear and woomera, as to having to invent why trade was happing (if you believe some modern history) with PNG.
Local aboriginals tell stories about coming into contact with differant homo species. They tell stories about sharing hunting techniques with them. Learning from them & sharing their knowlege with them. They say they where like us but not us. Differant. I wonder if it happened on their journey to australia or if it was on australian soil? Simply listening to the local stories helps with so much knowlege.
The 75000 year old, mighty Tuba eruption and it's near extinction of humans. Some two thousand survived? My grand children are the thirteenth generation following the marriage of the first known permanent white settler. She told of when her island people walked north to Victoria. Her island was over washed some five and a half thousand back, by the Berkle crater event. The few survivors had lost knowledge and were as children.
That the world has experienced different periods is not in dispute. What is, is actual theories and some evidence as to whom came from where and creation stories versus science. There is some evidence the earth contained sophisticated evolved societies well before it was thought the evolution of man took place. It is well to keep an open mind.
Bit of a late arrival to this thread guys & just scanning through the various comments. Dont want to muddy the waters further but heres my 2 bobs worth. Somewhere in my library here I have a book by Geoffery Blainey which sadly i dont have at hand. His book is called " The Triumph of the Nomads". This was published in the 80's (I think). Not sure whether his theories are still extant, been superceded, debunked or even forgotten. He postulated that there were 3 distinct waves of settlement over different time periods. One from the North West of WA via present day India another through Cape York via PNG & yet another through the Top End via Timor & much further north. He rather clumsily referred to the earlier arrivals which ultimately were confined to Tasmania as "Gracile" & the later arrivals as "Robust". As someone has also mentioned in this thread the later arrivals in NW WA painted over pre existing rock art there. The present day indigenous people are aware of this. Apparently there are traces of this original "art" still there. When questioned about this the present day local indigenous people refer to these as "rubbish art" & not important. So it appears there was already an established population until the later invaders pushed then out. As to the small Homo Florienses, there are legends in my home state of Qld extant among the rainforest tribes in the north about them.They are described as small (about 3' tall) & covered in fur with a distinct smell. NOT an unpleasant BO odour but a distinct earthy "wet fur" organic aroma. These are not ancient dreamtime stories but within living or near living memory. Many years ago I was pals with a Carnarvon Gorge Park ranger. He told me once of abseiling into a very deep gorge in an extremely remote area of the park not open or accessable to the public. At the bottom of the Gorge in the semi gloom & in the damp earth were a series of small footprints the size of a childs. The local tribe called Yiman were aware of these "little people" & called them Jun Juddee (not sure of the spelling sorry). According to the Yiman these Jun Juddee were peaceful though elusive. My small knowledge about these things pre dates recent discoverys of Denisovans but I believe there is are large traces of mitochondrial DNA in our present day indigenous population. As to the Mega fauna it is my firm though unproven theory that these have contributed to many of the dreamtime legends. If any of you has spent any length of time in the virgin bush pre electricity, roads or ABSOLUTELY NO modern conveniences with only a camfire as light & to cook your tucker at night you know there isnt much else to do except talk & yarn. Its so easy to understand how these stories of wierd animals get passed down from generation to generation. I find it more than coincidental that the disappearance of the mega fauna slots in quite neatly with modern theory of the time of arrival & invasion of the continent by our indigenous population. The mega fauna unused to this new predator would have been relatively easy prey. This is not a popular opinion to put out there to those who cherish the notion of living in harmony in our wonderful country. Not forgetting of course that the sea levels were much much lower around this time & it would have been much easier to "Island hop" into the north of the country. Cannot posit a theory as to why the spear & woomera was the preferred hunting weapons & the bow & arrow didnt make it here when it is used by our closest neighbours to the north in PNG. Best wishes to all
I am Australian and have a strong affinity for the 'bush' and buy that I mean any part from the deserts to the peaks. Ive been lucky enough to have travelled extensively throughout this ancient continent. To me this was very interesting as I also have an interest in desert dingoes and when they may have arrived. The belief is < 10k years ago but I'm quite convinced it's much earlier. I believe if early Australians settled 50k years ago the dingo would have travelled as well. I care for 3 pure desert dingoes...look up Sandy genome, that's my girl. Anyway thanks very interesting.
I did Archaeology at Melbourne University in 2000. All these sites were taught then; have we done no new stuff since then? These are three key sites, yes. But why aren't there any more? Or newer information?
@@Evolve.2on TH-cam there is a Murdoch University (Australia) video that outlines their genetic studies, tracing mutations and they say that there were 2 migration events and the earliest was 70k then a later one.
If only 300k to 700k people living in Australia at the time of Cook, the population should have been much higher if they'd been here for over 60k years.
@@garyschutz8880The population is very low because they never developed farming or any sort of long term food preservation technology. They didn't even develop permanent housing, ceramics or the bow and arrow 🫤
There is a father and son team, of which I can't recall names or links, that I saw on TH-cam saying Aborigines, or someone, had been along the southern coastline about 130kya. They gave good evidence, backed by others, of shell middens uncovered by eroding sand dunes.
10:35 : “the dunes are continuously shaped by wind and water, creating conditions perfect for fossil preservation”. Firstly what on earth does that mean?, and secondly it’s wrong. The lunettes were stable until overgrazing starting about 1850. Also, the original dating done by C14, as OSL had not been developed at that time. The effective limit of C14 is 40,000 years, which is why that age was often cited, until the more recent work of Roberts and Clarkson.
I think both theories hold merit. Which makes me think BOTH are plausible at the same time. Some dispersed due to Toba eruption and others arriving via sea and land bridge during the glacial maximum.
The Planck Institute showed that there were no genome or dna markers from Mungo Man in today's aboriginals in Australia. I don't need your special shoes as I ran barefoot for 18 years on my father's farm.
Even though I am not an evolutionist and don't accept the cognitive development theories, I found the video very interesting in explaining how the Aboriginal Peoples came here (to Australia). The evidence for the migrations does seem to support theory A, but Theory B also seems feasible.
Mica and silicone is mined in Tasmania for use in electronics/ mostly from Electrona . The geology is matched to northern USA and Antarctica / still not looking at Macquarie island and Antarctica/ Tasmanian people built and used sea going watercraft before the pryamids were built/ people sailed a raft from USA to Australia long ago to show the voyage is possible/ why not the other direction/ Indonesian pyramid is an easy voyage from Australia/ why not the other direction / lots of large sunken land in both the Indian Ocean and Tasman sea .
Care to put that into comprehensible English? I haven't had to translate gibberish in a while so I'm a bit rusty. Get someone to teach you about punctuation as well. I don't think it will make much difference though, as I'm pretty sure that what you are attempting to convey is nonsense anyway, but it would be nice to know for sure.
NOBODY ever sailed a raft from USA to Australia !!! You've gotten confused about the Kontiki expedition of Thor Heyerdahl !! 🤣 Why does NOBODY use Google before opening their mouth ?
@edwardfletcher7790 the raft sat in Ballina for a while some of it may be in Ballina maritime museum perhaps Kontiki expedition to prove the voyage possible
@edwardfletcher7790 Actually YOU are wrong not the other guy... south America to Australia by raft in 1973. Maybe take your own advice and YOU google it lol
How did a red-dark brown-haired species of humanoids travel from the Volga River area to South America? And what happened to them? Any genetic offspring?
There are two distinct groups in Australia . Tasmanian (the first arrivals) who were replaced on the mainland by a second wave of arrivals- this is fact.
Another ignored fact re: Tasmanian Aboriginals they didn't know how to create fire! If they lost their fire they needed to either find a bushfire or obtain from a friendly group. This fact was documented, but like many contradictory facts it's been buried.
@@rickblinkco2223 .. Palawa people have thrived in a dynamic island environment for more than 40,000 years (Cosgrove, 1990;Lehman, 2001;Fletcher and Thomas, 2010b;Cosgrove et al., 2014;Mariani et al., 2017;Romano and Fletcher, 2018;Fletcher et al., 2021a;Roberts et al., 2021). Their deep understanding and skillful manipulation of fire were central to their human ecology, shaping not only their survival, but also the very landscape they inhabited (Thomas and Kirkpatrick, 1996;Bowman, 1998;Gott, 2002;Fletcher et al., 2014Fletcher et al., , 2021aMariani et al., 2017;McWethy et al., 2017;Romano and Fletcher, 2018;Cooley et al., 2024). The unfortunate reality that Tasmania was declared "Aboriginal free" by 1836 (Lehman, 2001;Madley, 2008;Lawson, 2014;Brodie, 2017) means that an academic understanding of the human ecology of Palawa must principally rely on the ethnohistorical record that is often written by blinkered and biased Europeans who had long-cast Palawa as the lowest and "rudest type of man" (Gott, 2002, p. 652 (1992) compiled hundreds of accounts of Palawa fire use across almost every environment in Tasmania from ethnohistoric reports, concluding that, while the ethnohistoric record cannot be used to understand fire frequency or intensity with any great reliability, it is clear that fire was fundamental to the spiritual and economic lives of Palawa people. ...
Lies.... that's an old British Colonial lie to justify wiping put over 90% of the Aboriginal population. There is absolutely no evidence of what you said. Ps. There are over 300 distinct groups in Australia, and they're ALL Aboriginal.
Les Hiddens aka The Bush Tucker man tells a story of one of thhe first explores in Australia was greeted by Aborigines in the northern regions with Masonic hand gestures and he knew how to respond back being a member himself.
The impetus for the migration from asia was supposedly the super volcanic eruption of the volcano where Lake Toba in Sumatra is today 74,000 years ago.
Halloween question: How is it determined that Mungo Woman's burial site was a grave and not a BBQ pit? The condition of the remains may indicate either, or both. Bon apetit!
Ocean going vessel have to be open ocean grade to with stand open sea or risk capsizing. But I think this applies when traveling with weight or cargo. Such as a colony. People have floated on rafts lost at sea. Hard to believed a colony can get by on raft. The Australian should have perserve stories of their 65,000 year old trek so we have an idea. That wud be nice. I just imagine they had large 60 person canoes when they first set off. Must have been exciting for them
@Evolve.2 distinctive artwork that Aboriginal Australians recognises not their own in the Kimberley region of western Australia. They're all so a lot of boab trees around the area
@@Evolve.2 could you please notify me when you find out more and make an episode of this as I am extremely interested in the inhabitation of Australia find many different humans
I met an abo once up north who told me some of the rock drawings refer to a small tribe of flying spritmasters who used spider's silk for sky travel (wings or balloons?) --- they were delicious ! 😹
I just had a great Aunty tell me the tale she and her Husband crossed the Nullarbor Plains to WA late 60's before the road was sealed and were stopped by a Tribe Elder in just his waist cloth , Very dark skin. He was leaning on a Spear in the middle of the road. Somewhere near Eucla . Probably from the last of the First Nations on the Continent to start coming into contact with White Man. Not saying she/they was the first ones but certainly within a few years after initial contact in that area mind you.. It was barren and devoid of life out there as you could get on the continent. He traded some fruit for a Boomerang they still have.
the aussie aboriginal,s come from sth east india the dravidian ppl to b exact,,they walked ere via land bridge 4to5 thousand yrs ago n got stranded ere when the sea levels rose,,,any geneoligist that aint on the gov funded merrygoround will know the truth
Cool 🤠 Recommended are A secret country by John Pilger and his video The coming war on China. The song lines by Bruce Chatwin. The bushtucker man is a TV series etc ☝️❤️🇦🇺
Need to understand that New Guinea connected to Australia so New Guineans too part of the question. So why do they look sondifferent to Australian Aborigines? Aborigines NOT fully modern humans.
How did they here...they weren't sea travellers. Bark tree canoes is it 1:39 ! Polynesians from PNG were sea folk. Orstalia was connected to Indonesia etc via land bridge. That's how Aboriginals got here.
@@lebenstraum666oh I don't know there was much more land back before the waters rose and a little island hopping was all that was needed ! @....666 the Devil's in the detail ! ✝️👁️🌈🎱😹
No, we were NOT connected to Indonesia by a land bridge when the first people arrived here. If we were there would be monkeys and tigers and elephants here too. The Wallace Line explains that.
The key is in the artwork the bradshaw paintings were first paintings done the aboriginals call them rubbish paintings and graffiti over them then they say we were first here the only problem with that is you get better at art not worse the aboriginals probly ate the men and kept the females to breed with same as what happened with the Neanderthals in europe
@hmirleft5148 dude I'm Aussie. 1.2m and 85kg is small. The big fellas are around 2m tall and weigh near 120kg of pure, lean muscle. They used to have travelling boxing carnivals where you could box against kangaroos.... Ahhh the good old days....🤣
It started out at 20,000 then 40,000 , 60,000 the numbers keep getting bigger,it doesn’t matter how long they were here. Look at what the people in other parts of the world did and built in the same time.
I know, that's what amazes me, that over 60 k years or whatever, no advancement. No pots or pans even, just throw the meat or fish straight on the fire. No clothing, no house, nothing.
@johnrogers5824 Honestly? The oldest civilisations back then all disappeared. But Australian aboriginals culture is based on totally different ideals on how to live with the land and not on it. They had laws, territories, understanding of genetics, how to travel vast distances (even a songline that you could follow to cross the continent from east coast to west coast. They had international trade and took active role in land care. Every plant had a unique purpose and most have medicinal qualities. They had areas to grow different foods they needed. They didn’t need permanent towns or cities as they realised they needed to travel their land at different times to obtain their food and do land care. They knew that you couldn’t marry those with the same skin name as themselves and that was due to understanding genetics. They had ‘families’ with different mobs to keep the genetics clean and healthy. Try educating yourself about the oldest living culture before you make yourself look ignorant
@@leeannedowdell2110 Keep up that narrative if it makes you happy, but don't infer I am ignorant, as it promotes an obtuseness toward an ad hominem and ergo a detraction and degeneration. Your Indigenous Studies 101 are all well and good, but my experiences over the decades tell me a different narrative. Maybe find some old movie reels to expand your views. I find it amusing this Welcome to Country rubbish, and also copying the Haka at footy matches that started appearing in competition to NZers. I bet you read Bruce Pasce's writings.
@@leeannedowdell2110 interesting ideas you have about old civilisations disappearing, I don’t think they disappeared but rather,evolved technically over a long time. All ancient people started out on the same foot, no houses, no farming, no written language and so on but over a vast time span through ingenuity most civilisations advanced technically to what we have today. Australia has some of the worlds most abundant natural resources, coal, iron, gold and many many more. As an example, look at the Chinese, they have natural resources and have been using them for thousands of years. So you must see old civilisations did not disappear but technically advanced over a long period. The early aborigines did not advance. Had not the English found and settled Australia, or any other advanced country found or settled Australia, then the aboriginal people would be today, as they were one thousand years ago.
The was never a land bridge. The evidence is the Wallace line, look it up. Now for my contraversial statements. Homo Erectus was there first, Java man dates to 700 000 thousand years ago. By the time Homo Sapiens arrived in the area 50 000 years ago, Homo Erectus had evolved into Homo Denisovian, with a larger brain. If this seems a stretch, we have supposedly only been around for 60 000 years, Erectus has had over 500 000 years to evolve. My main reason to say this, you can not have ocean crossing of more than 100 kilometers on primitive rafts. Archeologists are not open ocean sailors. Remember any evidence of wooden boats from 100 000 years ago will have long vanished. So I contend that when Homo Sapiens turned up and bred with Denisovians, they went sailing to Australia.
Who says you can't cross nearly 100km of sea in canoes? Yes it's very hard and challenging but as long as you build it right and the weather is good it's quite possible
My speculation is based on the amount of time that Erectus had to develop seafaring. Sapiens developed sailing in 10 000 years, Erectus was around for 1 000 000 years. There is also evidence around that there were people on Australia 120 000 years ago, and also in South America. To me that leans to Seafaring with sails.
Very interesting may have been beyond the scope of this video However didn’t mention change of flora caused by human settlement and the introduction of fire for hunting etc Leading to gums eucalyptus etc dominating our environment inc many native plants relying now on fire for germination. However loved the video and does make me want to delve into our aboriginal past. All the best Lewis Sydney Australia 🇦🇺
That video discusses the arguments for and against the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis. He is one of the leading figures in the "for" side of the debate. Part of being unbiased is to explore all sides, even the ones that we don't agree with!
@ you talk about the oldest EVIDENCE in your title. There is not a shred of evidence for Hancock’s imaginative stories. None. He is not an archeologist. He is a writer who combines archeological phenomena with mythology. That’s fine, but don’t have him at the table when you want to discuss fact-based archeology and anthropology. There is a clear distinction between knowledge and believe, and instead of fanciful speculations it’s okay to admit ‘we just don’t know’. But I guess that doesn’t sell as many books or gets as many eyeballs.
@@Evolve.2 I live in NSW/Australia and I’m a trained researcher, so in many ways your piece on this topic is close to my heart and greatly appreciated. You did such a thorough job with your evidence based approach of the many questions and I learned a lot during your presentation. Personally, the escape from the Toba volcanic eruption is a plausible theory. That there is a 30,000 year discrepancy in the dating methods is concerning and a problem in itself. I haven’t looked at your other pieces yet, however seeing Hancock’s image at the end of your great presentation is like watching a well resourced documentary on the evolution of horses and ending it with an image of a unicorn.
We were in either the first or second dispersion out of Africa and genetics show we definitely stopped in India, on our way to the land mass known as Australia today
DNA from India can only be from between 5000 to 6000 years ago, funny how it matches the introduction of the dingo and the use of fine capped small stone tools. but let's say 50,000 to 60,000 instead.
@bkeckk nope lol Genetic testing provides no 'pure' point of reference for Aboriginal identity, especially given the history of colonisation in Australia. Scientists cannot now recover the control data that establishes the set of Indigenous genetic traits at contact.
@@BoydKyle-s1c not necessarily... theres alao a newer theory that hominids evolved in more than one continent - ie also had early hominids developing and then interbreeding later on....
@@liamgilham there is no pure point my statement was %11 Indian DNA for samples across Australia in largest study done in country, it's also can be no older than 5000 odd years ago, same time frame as dingo and fine small, capped stone tools 1st appeared in country
I'm trying to find a balance between all of the different cultures and periods around the world, but I will definitely do more on Australia in the future
I understood the number was 80,000 rather than 300,000, the age factor is incorrect as is evolution,. The difficulty I have with this is that Australia was part of the once single continent as was India and the Australian Aboriginals like some in India stem from the Negroid peoples of Africa. The original Australian Aboriginals, the Mungo People [ the Morori's of NZ were related were not fully associated with the current Aboriginals for many migrated to Australia about 4000 years ago. But there I stop.
@Daz-ty6bo no they didn't lol Genetic testing provides no 'pure' point of reference for Aboriginal identity, especially given the history of colonisation in Australia. Scientists cannot now recover the control data that establishes the set of Indigenous genetic traits at contact.2
I don't know if you're joking, but kangaroos don't need to be bred. There are massive amounts of kangaroos to the point that they are considered a pest in some areas. They are also used for food. They are delicious and one of the leanest meats you will find...
@paulfri1569 good question. It is a gamey meat which some people don't like. I think some people have a moral stance. It is our national animal on our national emblem and they are shot when hunted. It's not mass marketed either. I personally could live off it, but my wife doesn't want to know about it...
@@ThaMassDebater I see 🤔 Australia be the perfect place to have huge Kangaroo farms as they're use to the climate and Australia on a winner here if they had better Marketing people's 🥩
@paulfri1569 unless you build extra high and extra strong expanses of fencing (super expensive), you can't really "keep" or farm kangaroos... They jump over the regular cow and sheep fencing. It's more commercially viable to have the farmers, cull them on their own properties. There are companies that commercially "produce" kangaroo for supermarket and export. Most of our grocery stores, especially our big chains do stock roo meat...
Aboriginals didnt come to australia by canoe. They walked here. They had only the most primitive tools... think stones and sticks. No metal working, no wheels, no footwear, no dwellings, no agriculture
They also have unique genetic markers that are missing in most of the rest of the human race (aboriginals are not the only race like this, Tibetans and others have such unique markers as well).
@@tablescissors funny thing about their DNA it has Indian markers (M 42 a and b mitochondrial DNA markers) that can only be from 5000 years ago found in Victorian, Queensland, West Australia and South Australian Aboriginals in the largest DNA study done to date, it also matches up with the change found in stone tools, the introduction of the dingo (who had to be brought over by canoe with man because a lack of Landbridge's at that time), but it's always pushed aside because it doesn't match up with the made-up history(fantasy) spread today
Well you've obviously never heard of the Wallice Line that separates Australia from the rest of the world. You couldn't possibly walk to Australia 60,000 years ago ! Same today.... ofcourse they had seafaring canoes. Aboriginal people were the first ocean farers. Get over it.
How we found what we call evil the other guy or gal doing ? Thus a reason to blame them . If not teally you running better. If you then chasing them out better ?
Harari's cognitive revolution probably never existed. Homo erectus was already crossing long stretches of ocean to colonize Indonesian islands, neanderthals were already making art in Europe and human ancestors had been migrating across continents for the last 2 million years, so none of the examples of that revolution was and invention of that period. It was probably a much more gradual and quantitative rather than qualitative change.
First of all, there aren't any long stretches of ocean between the Indonesian islands and the mainland. Secondly, Homo erectus didn't have to cross ANY stretch of ocean. They walked there. During glacial periods of the current ice age, the sea level was lower and the Indonesian islands were part of the mainland.
@@MultiRationalThinker They MOSTLY walked, but they would have had to cross water at the Wallace Line. It's 250m deep and a major barrier point with the evolution of species. Only 1 small island has species from both Asia and Australasia represented.
@@juanlapuente833 If you believe the cognitive revolution never existed as a distinct event, what do you think are the most important factors that contributed to human cognitive and cultural development over time?
some feedback. while interesting it’s presented rather drably. the stock footage doesn’t always match the topic being discussed. doesn’t get to the point quickly enough, too much slow imparting of facts. also think that the sea level was lower at the time they arrived, it was possible to walk to Tasmania or PNG. Also you didn’t warn first nations people they may see deceased individuals when they watch this which I believe is required for such videos.
Doesn’t explain why the last 3 South American sisters in Patagonia from the original South Americans, when genetically tested were more closely related to Tasmanian aboriginals than anyone else. Showing a common ancestor. Also why the first temples in turkey depict aboriginal art. Why was bread making technology used in Australia thousands of years before it was used in the fertile cresent? When aboriginals in Tasmania didn’t even wear cloths in a cold environment and could catch seafood naked in cold temperatures they are called primitive. But when a white European can do it he is called superhuman.
There are no Australian aboriginal symbols in Turkey or gobeki tepe.... the symbols are NOT the same. There is no connection, just poor and misleading "research" by you.
Which theory do you believe?
Don’t forget to grab a pair of Vivobarefoot shoes with the EVOLVE20 discount code! www.vivobarefoot.com/us/
20:24 "Aboriginals could have come into contact with Denisovans, Neanderthals or the Hobbit (Homo Floriensis)"
We know for a fact that Aboriginals came into "contact" with Denisovans, because Aboriginals have a high percentage of Denisovan DNA, 5 - 10%
Have you seen the "Monash University” Sahultime work ? You didn't mention it in the video.
(Scientific) Theories don’t ask to be believed, but tested or, in the absence of tests - strengthened.
I was the archaeologist who discovered and first excavated the site of Madjedbebe in 1973 (at thst time the field code for the shelter site was Malakunanja II). I radiocarbon-dated the evidence of human occupation in the shelter as probably older than 18,000 yeas ago. Since then, the site has been re-excavated twice and is now claimed to be the oldest Aboriginal site in Australia.
I do not agree at all with the most recent dating of the site. There is evidence of termite bioturbation of the sand layer. It it is the sand grains that have been dated, not the stone artefacts. In a sand body the stone artefacts tend to move downward over thousands of years due to invertebrate bioturbation and other agencies of sand grain disturbance, such as reptile burrowing and tree roots (yes, even today trees grow into the sediment within the shelter).
Even though the claim for 65,000 years has been seriously challenged in by eminent archaeologists and dating experts publishing in professional journalists no one is listening, least of all the popular media.
Nice to get something "from the horse's mouth". Sadly the media are after circulation and so instinctively tend to gravitate towards the more extreme and sensational options available. And that is BEFORE the headline writers get their hands on a story. Thanks for your literally ground breaking work.
While I like your contribution, to try and keep researchers honest, it is also easy to get the impression of a bit of sour grapes towards people who have taken your great finds further.
@@PabloP169 Disagreement on intellectual grounds and "sour grapes" are two different things. This was the former. Your comment was unworthy.
I've heard the termite objection before, and I'm not particularly well read - it may even be on Wikipedia. So some of us are listening!
The 65.000 year claim never really made sense to me - H.sapiens had barely left Africa. I get that some people are very motivated to establish extreme antiquity for indigenous Australians (and I've learned to just let that pass like a mythological story) but they'll be calling them H.erectus if they push it back much further.
From what I've read, most archeologists agree that the site was first occupied by humans at least 50,000 years ago, but there is some debate about it being 65,000 years ago. How is it that you are saying 18,000 and so many are saying at least 50,000?
"Imagine a kangaroo 2m tall that weighs over 200 pounds"
Haha.. they're still around dude.
Those Nate Diaz Kangaroos lol yikes.
@Evolve.2 it's just the average size of a Red Kangaroo.
200 kilograms mate, and almost 8ft tall.
(The reconstruction at Naracoorte Fossil Centre is amazing 👍)
Big Reds top out about 6'6" which is still terrifying.
They certainly are! Some of our Wedgies are close to the size of Condors too. I think it's the food source, the irrigation of the land and the massive truck road kills that provide all the food so they really don't have to work hard.
@markthomas8766 That's a good theory, but it's genetic factors that cause size increase, not plentiful diet.
The oldest sediments we will find will be underwater.
The first settlement will be underwater.
Will never know how old they are
Spot on..
Silly monkey, waves are for erectoids, get back up here! Find the old rivers and underwater caves... find the polar trek routes... 1.5 million years is a long time for a bunch of horny hominids going out for snacks to find some others who might be doin' t'same ol' thang!
Why should the oldest be underwater?
@@PanglossDr because of their arrival time.
Is would have been glaciated
You're a wombat.
Not all of 'Australia ' was a penal colony
Eg South Australia.
Yup, my family came over on the first settlers boat and ended up in Adelaide. I mean if we just stole a loaf of bread, apple, coal or an onion - free trip to Australia!
@@Bob-Jenkins not in south Australia mate, we paid our way here and bought land, was the only Free settlement, All other states started with convicts. So your family didnt come to South Australia with the first fleet.
On 15 August 1834, the British Parliament passed the South Australia Act 1834 (Foundation Act), which empowered His Majesty to erect and establish a province or provinces in southern Australia. The act stated that the land between 132° and 141° east longitude and from 26° south latitude to the southern ocean would be allotted to the intended colony, and it would be convict-free. Seven vessels and 636 people was temporarily made at Kingscote on Kangaroo Island, until the official site of the capital was selected by William Light, where the City of Adelaide is currently located. The first immigrants arrived at Holdfast Bay (near the present day Glenelg) in November 1836.
The USA was a Penal Colony that had more convicts than Australia
@@bkeckk But there were Whalers and Sealers in the Victor Harbour /Cape Jervis/Kangaroo Island area before 1830.The Sea Lion Colonies got a serious workover back then. Not until the 1980's before Humpback Whales started venturing up Fleurieu Peninsula Coast again. Early Lutheran Fathers had tales told to them the Kaurna People initially thought they were there dead ancestors had come back from the other world
There’s a bit of mis-information in this video. The first people’s to migrate here were the Pigmytes who originated from what is now the Borneo region. They crossed the ice sheets several ice ages ago and settled in the highlands of northern Queensland. Later migrations saw the pygmites wiped out and disappear into history by the ‘Murrian’ aborigines. Unfortunately, the people who claim to be ‘First Nation’ are factually’Second Nation’ as they were not here first…..😂
Have Pygmy remains ever been found in Australia..?
@ Yep in an extensive study conducted by 2 Canadian PHD researchers in the 1960’s. The report was conveniently brushed under the carpet as the rather controversial Eddie Mabo negotiations were underway at the time.
G'day @ASR-1095. After a quick search, I haven't been able to find any information about the 1960's Canadian Report. Yet I know that the aboriginal people around Karanda on the Baron River near Cains have the reputation of something like a "pygmy" tribe of aboriginal people. The Karanda Public School use to have the lowest average height in Australia. Do you have any more clues to your story about this? Extra information might help sort this out. Obviously Genetic studies would be wonderful.
Well at least longer than you people anyway 😂😂😂😂😂😂
I live in Karratha in North Western Australia and we have rock art that has been dated back 60,000 years. We are 1000kms from the top of Australia so up there they've definitely been around alot longer than that
Australia has some pretty sick rock art!
Fake dated. Heavily disputed dates.
Ikor can not be carbon dates. Even the government website says it's impossible to date their painting because the paint is minerals and not organic
@@lordbrenno6354 typically archaeologists will date organic things around or in association with the ochre
@@Evolve.2 that would only give a true date if the aboriginals dug the cave.what come first, man or the cave?.. Also the whole 65k year thing they push is a stretch considering we only "believe" carbon lasts 50k years.
The graphic on the thumbnail asks "How did they get There". The first human inhabitants had to reach New Guinea by watercraft of some sort. Rafts or dugout canoes most likely. One they reached New Guinea they could reach Australia by walking. The migration path assumes the events took place during the last Glacial Advance. And that enough of the current Arafura Sea and the Gulf of Carpentaria where dry land at the time. Watercraft are required to due to deep water gaps between islands that lay between Sunda Land and Sahal.
One thing to note. It was never a purposeful migration with a destination in mind.
They did NOT all come down from what is now PNG when the land bridge was in place. They also arrived from Indonesia and west of where the PNG lot did.
And they had NO dugout canoes until the Makassans arrived for their yearly fishing visits a few hundred years ago.
The method for getting the correct age for human habitation of the Australian continent is: ...
1. Think of a number in thousands of years...
2. double it...
3. mention a scientific paper
4. add 10,000 years
5. reference Indigenous legends of having ''always'' been in the continent
6. add another 10,000 years
7 mention another scientific paper that puts human evolution back by another 100,000 years
8. ignore evidence about the arrival of the dingo
9. ignore evidence about linguistic variation and dialectic shift
10. ignore any evidence that offers contradictions or dismissals of the number that you want to be true
11. scream ''racist''! if anyone questions your final figure.
Same with Europe, Africa, the Americas... but, with eldritch humor, the newer more inclusive models are turning out to be more accurate after the dust, so to speak, settles and the real work is engaged. Racist? No, but with our multi-sourced species mutthood, RACIALism (Neandertal, Heidelbergensis, Denisovan, Sapiens... etc) is not a horrid way to describe our origins. i mean, not that long ago a market bizarre might have held recent hybrids of the above and more... How bizarre is that?
You can also ignore any evidence and actually be a racist... I've found that people who complain about being labelled racist often have a reason they were labelled racist.
@@thesociophobe8425 Are you saying there's no smoke without fire? A commonly thrown adage, but a fallacious argument nonetheless. I gather your meaning, but my point still stands, I think. It's all too easy to throw out ''Racist!'' and get away with it. One might just as well cry ''Witch!'' Such are the times we live in... and the purity of Logic and the genius of the Scientific Method are ruined for all.
@@v1e1r1g1e1 yes, I agree, you're probably white.
@@v1e1r1g1e1right*
Be funny if everyone came from Australia not Africa 😂
Reverse UNO?
You mean Straya mate..😁🏈🍻🇦🇺
Lol
Be careful because the indigenous Australians will be claiming that next and will claim that they were first everywhere in the world, last thing you want is a welcome to country in Europe or Asia or the Americas
There is a theory proposing this.
Many interesting facts regarding the history and research of Australia and you raise a very thought provoking notion about mass migration as a result of volcanic activity at the end of this video...great presentation. With that part of the world being dotted with thousands of islands, sand bars and shoals etc its easy to see how inviting it must have been to develop boats and rafts etc then further refine the technology as they gained more knowledge.
So where was this refined tech' when early explorers visited the top of Australia?
Are you actually claiming that 60,000 years ago humans developed sea going water craft and set sail to go exploring?
They did not even have dugout canoes until a few hundred years ago after the Makassans began coming here yearly for trepang etc and traded them.
They most likely arrived here after tsunamis or cyclones etc washed them out to sea clinging to tree trunks or similar.
Over tens of thousands of years enough would have made it here and started breeding up, and likely every couple of centuries or so a couple more arrived.
Australia was a part of Sahul, the super-continent. And in Sahul lived the much earlier human species, Denisovan. If Erectus didn't like in Sahul then maybe Denisovan were the 'first Australians.'
theory C: follow migratory birds, and by their nature, knowing what habitats await.
I would agree, observation of migrations would have let them know there was land out there.
@@PanglossDr yeah the bin chicken bird idk the real name doesnt it migrate to aus from somewhere heaps of ancient birds would have known about aus if a human was smart enough to know a ancient bird expert maybe would figure that out cool idea its how people find water and land using birds and other animals
A good video, thank you.
An observation, because there is room for the possibility. We have evidence of occupation in Australia going back about 60k years, but modern human remains 'only' going back to about 45k years. Given there is strong evidence for more than one branch of Denisovans well before 60k years in SE Asia there is room to consider H. Sapiens was not the first 'human' group to make it to Australia.
That's a great point. Species like Denisovans or Homo floresiensis could have made it to Australia first. Sounds like a great question for a future video topic!
The Kow Swamp Skulls were not gracile. Not like modern humans and had pronounced brow ridges. The first anthropologists to study those Skulls thought they were Homo Erectus. That theory doesn't sit well with todays narrative so they are now called modern human skulls.
@@Evolve.2
True, I’ve done a few random deep dives over the yrs (am admittedly lazy Re: taking notes etc lol) but there are if you dig around enough records of aborigines and early settlers referring to a pigmy race that preceded aboriginal arrival that were hunted out by them. Also plenty to indicate they were much more civilised than we’re lead to believe ie: huts, community structures etc,
Do a Google/TH-cam search on the ancient grain belt that ran from east to west across the country, interesting shit!👍
@@bennybottleface8804There's no evidence of the so-called pygmies. It's a myth.
@@bennybottleface8804thanks! Never heard of the grain belt, so I gotta check that out
Be careful about what you read or listen to, a Anthropologist from Adelaide who mapped out all of the Indigenous languages in the early 1900's, believed there were 3 waves of early visitors to Aus, also there were Africans here (Boab Trees and Bradshaw paintings),but in the 1970's the said Anthropologists work was discredited by a "selected" group so as to push a political agenda. Look up Norman Tindale's work. Fact human kidney fat was a delicacy for certain Indigenous tribes, plus tribal warfare was very common. Do your own research though but a lot of old papers/books are hard to find.
Thank you
Boabs have been here longer than people mate
@@simonjones2645State your references...
lol
Look up what the name "Deniliquin" Native name means.
Says it all ???
Holding hands all singing "Kumbaya" ?
Really ?????
We have forgotten the last two people who were the last native people of Terr Del Feuago, at the southern tip of South America. Their DNA, was shown to be as Australian aborigionals.
An open mind is required in anthropology, Archeology as the next find can change everything previously held as truth, DNA and ghost ancestors must be taken into consideration
@infidel202 nope....
Genetic testing provides no 'pure' point of reference for Aboriginal identity, especially given the history of colonisation in Australia. Scientists cannot now recover the control data that establishes the set of Indigenous genetic traits at contact.2
@@liamgilham nope, interesting response, are you an Archeology student, there are quite a few examples of DNA related to Aboriginal Australians, Papua new Guinea Tribes, why would you assume homo erectus, Dennisovan or Floriance just a few hominids found in Indonesia, Cambodia, New Guinea ect plus the genetic evidence would after travelling across the world not visit Australia
that was an interesting and pretty comprehensive vid. nice one dude 😁
Glad you liked it!
Apparently there was a large continent of landmass that "sank " into the Pacific thousands of years ago .
Elders have mentioned this and visits from Egyptian / phonecian "people" long time ago ???
"History " is exactly that HIS STORY.
So much more could really be learn with open & questioning minds.........
They are Indian descent. Hundreds of different tribal groupings arrived in 3 main waves. First wave was almost wiped out by the second wave, second wave almost wiped out by the third wave. First arrival is thought to be genuinely around 3000 years ago. Lots of people say 50,000 years, but there is no evidence for this. Indonesians arrived thousands of years prior.
My theory is that all they had to do was cross the narrow Wallace line. As on one side animals in the Australian family come up to. Which shows getting to that point from Australia must have been possible. Once crossed, just walk on in from PNG. I mean if the marsupials can do it then a bipedal hominid with a big brain could. So all it takes is a good ice age and someone willing to cross about 35km of water. Or accidentally crossing it while fishing.
Mungo Man didn't just appear in Western New South Wales.
He would have travelled down from the top of Australia.
Considering how life it is further north it would have taken a while to get down that far.
The problem with Australia is our Soils aren't good for keeping skeletons intact.
Also Australia was at the start of an ice age and more land would possibly be exposed. I mentioned this because the distance would be even greater.
Just found your channel and I love it! My favourite subject since I was 8 and discovered our incredible history ❤️ ♥️ 👏
That's awesome! Welcome aboard
Aboriginals of Australia didn't have bows and arrows.
Oh really dumbass Americans
@@krunomrki they didn't need them/ mostly gathering food / hunting was opportunistic/ if starving they ate people/ same as caucasian people/ if you are hungry eat WEF NWO people not bug's
@@Gorloxen Please explain Egypt (bows used to hunt everything from birds to lions and elephant's) or Native Americans (buffalo hunters on the planes with bows) Bows are more accurate, shoot farther, faster and you can carry more arrows than spears.
As to wood, plenty of native woods and reeds, are great to make bows and arrows (seen vids on bowers making them out of different Australian native woods, plus bundled reed bows like in PNG). They even had the fine chipped stone tool knowledge (came over with the dingo about 5000 years ago). So, what do you know about hunting or Australia again?
@@Gorloxen lets not start the fairy tale about the oldest culture on earth because it's not us. The Australian Aboriginals DNA (from across Australia) has 11% Indian DNA from no less than 5000 years ago (same time frame as dingo and small capped stone tools) we were in a constant state of intertribal warfare, you're from the east coast so cannibal practices throughout the area, are culture is different from tribe to tribe same as language.
As to hunting in Australia (with bows, guns, knife and dogs) all across the outback (NT, SA, QLD, NSW) from deer, goats, kangaroo, camel and pigs and bow is so much easier, quicker and more accurate than a spear and woomera, as to having to invent why trade was happing (if you believe some modern history) with PNG.
Fuck no, they had heat seeking missiles.
From India?
Spot on..
@@bellrugby03 Plus some Indonesian mixture on the way also 🤔
@@paulfri1569
And now, Greek / Italian and most of all , Houso..😁🇦🇺🏈⚓️🍻
From Antarctica I reckon. Via Tasmania. Maybe...
I wonder if they bowl with their sleeve obscuring their cheating elbow?
Pangea was around millions of years ago....one continent...we are all from same origin.
Local aboriginals tell stories about coming into contact with differant homo species. They tell stories about sharing hunting techniques with them. Learning from them & sharing their knowlege with them. They say they where like us but not us. Differant. I wonder if it happened on their journey to australia or if it was on australian soil? Simply listening to the local stories helps with so much knowlege.
The 75000 year old, mighty Tuba eruption and it's near extinction of humans. Some two thousand survived? My grand children are the thirteenth generation following the marriage of the first known permanent white settler. She told of when her island people walked north to Victoria. Her island was over washed some five and a half thousand back, by the Berkle crater event. The few survivors had lost knowledge and were as children.
Burkle meteor strike was a hellofa big bang. It was an extensive devastation of many shoreline people in western and southern Australia.
What were the bird migratory patterns over the jumping-off point?
That the world has experienced different periods is not in dispute. What is, is actual theories and some evidence as to whom came from where and creation stories versus science. There is some evidence the earth contained sophisticated evolved societies well before it was thought the evolution of man took place. It is well to keep an open mind.
They came from India
We most definitely stopped in India after we left Africa and made our way to the land mass known today as Australia.
The north west natives definitely have traits from India. The native in central Australia are unique.
and they're still there but they are called the untouchables, the lowest caste in India.
Bit of a late arrival to this thread guys & just scanning through the various comments. Dont want to muddy the waters further but heres my 2 bobs worth. Somewhere in my library here I have a book by Geoffery Blainey which sadly i dont have at hand. His book is called " The Triumph of the Nomads". This was published in the 80's (I think). Not sure whether his theories are still extant, been superceded, debunked or even forgotten. He postulated that there were 3 distinct waves of settlement over different time periods. One from the North West of WA via present day India another through Cape York via PNG & yet another through the Top End via Timor & much further north. He rather clumsily referred to the earlier arrivals which ultimately were confined to Tasmania as "Gracile" & the later arrivals as "Robust". As someone has also mentioned in this thread the later arrivals in NW WA painted over pre existing rock art there. The present day indigenous people are aware of this. Apparently there are traces of this original "art" still there. When questioned about this the present day local indigenous people refer to these as "rubbish art" & not important. So it appears there was already an established population until the later invaders pushed then out. As to the small Homo Florienses, there are legends in my home state of Qld extant among the rainforest tribes in the north about them.They are described as small (about 3' tall) & covered in fur with a distinct smell. NOT an unpleasant BO odour but a distinct earthy "wet fur" organic aroma. These are not ancient dreamtime stories but within living or near living memory. Many years ago I was pals with a Carnarvon Gorge Park ranger. He told me once of abseiling into a very deep gorge in an extremely remote area of the park not open or accessable to the public. At the bottom of the Gorge in the semi gloom & in the damp earth were a series of small footprints the size of a childs. The local tribe called Yiman were aware of these "little people" & called them Jun Juddee (not sure of the spelling sorry). According to the Yiman these Jun Juddee were peaceful though elusive. My small knowledge about these things pre dates recent discoverys of Denisovans but I believe there is are large traces of mitochondrial DNA in our present day indigenous population. As to the Mega fauna it is my firm though unproven theory that these have contributed to many of the dreamtime legends. If any of you has spent any length of time in the virgin bush pre electricity, roads or ABSOLUTELY NO modern conveniences with only a camfire as light & to cook your tucker at night you know there isnt much else to do except talk & yarn. Its so easy to understand how these stories of wierd animals get passed down from generation to generation. I find it more than coincidental that the disappearance of the mega fauna slots in quite neatly with modern theory of the time of arrival & invasion of the continent by our indigenous population. The mega fauna unused to this new predator would have been relatively easy prey. This is not a popular opinion to put out there to those who cherish the notion of living in harmony in our wonderful country. Not forgetting of course that the sea levels were much much lower around this time & it would have been much easier to "Island hop" into the north of the country. Cannot posit a theory as to why the spear & woomera was the preferred hunting weapons & the bow & arrow didnt make it here when it is used by our closest neighbours to the north in PNG. Best wishes to all
Pretty much all the DNA dating is post-Blainey.
When the first aboriginal people arrived on the Kimberly coast of the Sahul continent that coastline was 160km further out to sea.
I am Australian and have a strong affinity for the 'bush' and buy that I mean any part from the deserts to the peaks. Ive been lucky enough to have travelled extensively throughout this ancient continent. To me this was very interesting as I also have an interest in desert dingoes and when they may have arrived. The belief is < 10k years ago but I'm quite convinced it's much earlier. I believe if early Australians settled 50k years ago the dingo would have travelled as well. I care for 3 pure desert dingoes...look up Sandy genome, that's my girl. Anyway thanks very interesting.
thanks!
I did Archaeology at Melbourne University in 2000. All these sites were taught then; have we done no new stuff since then? These are three key sites, yes. But why aren't there any more? Or newer information?
Please share if you know of more recent research that changes these sites/dates! These were the oldest reasonable sites I could find in my research
@@Evolve.2on TH-cam there is a Murdoch University (Australia) video that outlines their genetic studies, tracing mutations and they say that there were 2 migration events and the earliest was 70k then a later one.
If only 300k to 700k people living in Australia at the time of Cook, the population should have been much higher if they'd been here for over 60k years.
@@garyschutz8880The population is very low because they never developed farming or any sort of long term food preservation technology.
They didn't even develop permanent housing, ceramics or the bow and arrow 🫤
@@edwardfletcher7790 so they're better off with European settlement?
There was 120 meter less water 12.000 years ago....they walked. All the way up in the Pacific. Tens of thousands islands like Micronesia today
Apparently there were three different migrations of separate racial groups over thousands of years. The Tasmanian group among the first.
A lot more than that
Just all theories like plenty others out there
i live here, we stole this land from the abbo's who stole it from primitive men !!!
Who tf is we? Because last I checked china is taking over lol
I was in Australia at the turn of October and November last year. This country-continent is fascinating in every respect. ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤


There is a father and son team, of which I can't recall names or links, that I saw on TH-cam saying Aborigines, or someone, had been along the southern coastline about 130kya. They gave good evidence, backed by others, of shell middens uncovered by eroding sand dunes.
10:35 : “the dunes are continuously shaped by wind and water, creating conditions perfect for fossil preservation”. Firstly what on earth does that mean?, and secondly it’s wrong. The lunettes were stable until overgrazing starting about 1850. Also, the original dating done by C14, as OSL had not been developed at that time. The effective limit of C14 is 40,000 years, which is why that age was often cited, until the more recent work of Roberts and Clarkson.
I think both theories hold merit. Which makes me think BOTH are plausible at the same time. Some dispersed due to Toba eruption and others arriving via sea and land bridge during the glacial maximum.
I agree! I think it's similar to the peopling of the Americas, where there were probably multiple phases of migrations with multiple causes
The Planck Institute showed that there were no genome or dna markers from Mungo Man in today's aboriginals in Australia.
I don't need your special shoes as I ran barefoot for 18 years on my father's farm.
Even though I am not an evolutionist and don't accept the cognitive development theories, I found the video very interesting in explaining how the Aboriginal Peoples came here (to Australia). The evidence for the migrations does seem to support theory A, but Theory B also seems feasible.
Thanks for being open-minded!
Mica and silicone is mined in Tasmania for use in electronics/ mostly from Electrona . The geology is matched to northern USA and Antarctica / still not looking at Macquarie island and Antarctica/ Tasmanian people built and used sea going watercraft before the pryamids were built/ people sailed a raft from USA to Australia long ago to show the voyage is possible/ why not the other direction/ Indonesian pyramid is an easy voyage from Australia/ why not the other direction / lots of large sunken land in both the Indian Ocean and Tasman sea .
Care to put that into comprehensible English? I haven't had to translate gibberish in a while so I'm a bit rusty. Get someone to teach you about punctuation as well.
I don't think it will make much difference though, as I'm pretty sure that what you are attempting to convey is nonsense anyway, but it would be nice to know for sure.
NOBODY ever sailed a raft from USA to Australia !!!
You've gotten confused about the Kontiki expedition of Thor Heyerdahl !! 🤣
Why does NOBODY use Google before opening their mouth ?
@edwardfletcher7790 the raft sat in Ballina for a while some of it may be in Ballina maritime museum perhaps Kontiki expedition to prove the voyage possible
Nope Electrona is not ... all closed down now
@edwardfletcher7790 Actually YOU are wrong not the other guy... south America to Australia by raft in 1973. Maybe take your own advice and YOU google it lol
How did a red-dark brown-haired species of humanoids travel from the Volga River area to South America? And what happened to them? Any genetic offspring?
There are two distinct groups in Australia . Tasmanian (the first arrivals) who were replaced on the mainland by a second wave of arrivals- this is fact.
I have a similar theory.
Another ignored fact re: Tasmanian Aboriginals they didn't know how to create fire! If they lost their fire they needed to either find a bushfire or obtain from a friendly group. This fact was documented, but like many contradictory facts it's been buried.
@@rickblinkco2223 .. Palawa people have thrived in a dynamic island environment for more than 40,000 years (Cosgrove, 1990;Lehman, 2001;Fletcher and Thomas, 2010b;Cosgrove et al., 2014;Mariani et al., 2017;Romano and Fletcher, 2018;Fletcher et al., 2021a;Roberts et al., 2021). Their deep understanding and skillful manipulation of fire were central to their human ecology, shaping not only their survival, but also the very landscape they inhabited (Thomas and Kirkpatrick, 1996;Bowman, 1998;Gott, 2002;Fletcher et al., 2014Fletcher et al., , 2021aMariani et al., 2017;McWethy et al., 2017;Romano and Fletcher, 2018;Cooley et al., 2024). The unfortunate reality that Tasmania was declared "Aboriginal free" by 1836 (Lehman, 2001;Madley, 2008;Lawson, 2014;Brodie, 2017) means that an academic understanding of the human ecology of Palawa must principally rely on the ethnohistorical record that is often written by blinkered and biased Europeans who had long-cast Palawa as the lowest and "rudest type of man" (Gott, 2002, p. 652 (1992) compiled hundreds of accounts of Palawa fire use across almost every environment in Tasmania from ethnohistoric reports, concluding that, while the ethnohistoric record cannot be used to understand fire frequency or intensity with any great reliability, it is clear that fire was fundamental to the spiritual and economic lives of Palawa people. ...
Lies.... that's an old British Colonial lie to justify wiping put over 90% of the Aboriginal population. There is absolutely no evidence of what you said.
Ps. There are over 300 distinct groups in Australia, and they're ALL Aboriginal.
@@rickblinkco2223preposterous...a simple google search would tell you that Tasmanian Aboriginals absolutely knew how to make fire. Research !
Les Hiddens aka The Bush Tucker man tells a story of one of thhe first explores in Australia was greeted by Aborigines in the northern regions with Masonic hand gestures and he knew how to respond back being a member himself.
Yes because over the last 200 years we have masons here too .....less wasn't making first contact with a forgotten tribe ffs lol
30 seconds of actual content squeezed in to a 30 minute video. Yawn!
100%. Need a TLDR version.
Then tik tok is probably more your thing.........
The ever shrinking attention span.
The impetus for the migration from asia was supposedly the super volcanic eruption of the volcano where Lake Toba in Sumatra is today 74,000 years ago.
except they dont live in african huts?!?
Your ancestors lived in wood huts until very recently.... what's your point?
Who would have transported African huts to Australia?
@@Gorloxenexcept for the stone huts found in Victoria.. so you're wrong lol
The truth is They don't really know WHERE human's evolved From.. may be Europe or Australia or somewhere else....
Please do another video on the different genetic dispersals
Thanks for the suggestion! Definitely planning a video on genetic dispersals and early migrations at some point.
Aussie here
If the population only grew to 300,000 to 700,000 over tens of thousands of years, I'm not sure it qualifies as thriving.
Barely surviving would be more apt
Or they've only been here a couple of thousand years.
Less people less human body waste. I call that smart.Look how filthy large populated areas are in 2024.
@@garyschutz8880That's just silly, the scientific proof of 60,000yrs is everywhere.
I hope you're not implying some sorry of Biblical "proof" ? 🤡
@@edwardfletcher7790 no proof at all. Even carbon dating isn't accurate.
Halloween question: How is it determined that Mungo Woman's burial site was a grave and not a BBQ pit? The condition of the remains may indicate either, or both. Bon apetit!
Ocean going vessel have to be open ocean grade to with stand open sea or risk capsizing. But I think this applies when traveling with weight or cargo. Such as a colony. People have floated on rafts lost at sea. Hard to believed a colony can get by on raft. The Australian should have perserve stories of their 65,000 year old trek so we have an idea. That wud be nice. I just imagine they had large 60 person canoes when they first set off. Must have been exciting for them
Awesome program. Would like to see you do an episode of the Bradshaw art coming to Australia. Again thank you for your episode
I appreciate that! And thanks for the suggestion. I'm not familiar with the Bradshaw art, tell me more.
@Evolve.2 distinctive artwork that Aboriginal Australians recognises not their own in the Kimberley region of western Australia. They're all so a lot of boab trees around the area
@ very interesting, I’ll have to check that out
@@Evolve.2 could you please notify me when you find out more and make an episode of this as I am extremely interested in the inhabitation of Australia find many different humans
@ I’ll certainly try to find time to fit it in the upload schedule!
1:28 that would have to be Toba. 70000 + years ago.
And RIO Tinto blew up Juukan Gorge. Estimated at least 50,000 years old.
I met an abo once up north who told me some of the rock drawings refer to a small tribe of flying spritmasters who used spider's silk for sky travel (wings or balloons?) --- they were delicious ! 😹
Thanks
No, thank you!
I just had a great Aunty tell me the tale she and her Husband crossed the Nullarbor Plains to WA late 60's before the road was sealed and were stopped by a Tribe Elder in just his waist cloth , Very dark skin. He was leaning on a Spear in the middle of the road. Somewhere near Eucla . Probably from the last of the First Nations on the Continent to start coming into contact with White Man. Not saying she/they was the first ones but certainly within a few years after initial contact in that area mind you.. It was barren and devoid of life out there as you could get on the continent. He traded some fruit for a Boomerang they still have.
500,000 + years plus is the New Estimate
The got it all wrong we all come from Australia not Africa
the aussie aboriginal,s come from sth east india the dravidian ppl to b exact,,they walked ere via land bridge 4to5 thousand yrs ago n got stranded ere when the sea levels rose,,,any geneoligist that aint on the gov funded merrygoround will know the truth
and you would know sure everyone listen to this expert scientist made a discovery
Cool 🤠 Recommended are A secret country by John Pilger and his video The coming war on China. The song lines by Bruce Chatwin. The bushtucker man is a TV series etc ☝️❤️🇦🇺
Do read "The Biggest Estate on Earth" by Bill Gammage - priceless.
Need to understand that New Guinea connected to Australia so New Guineans too part of the question. So why do they look sondifferent to Australian Aborigines? Aborigines NOT fully modern humans.
Png got more Asian blood, aboriginal got more African blood, not that simple ....
How did they here...they weren't sea travellers. Bark tree canoes is it 1:39 !
Polynesians from PNG were sea folk.
Orstalia was connected to Indonesia etc via land bridge.
That's how Aboriginals got here.
Never even-invented the wheel or bow and arrow
No land bridge.
@@lebenstraum666oh I don't know there was much more land back before the waters rose and a little island hopping was all that was needed ! @....666 the Devil's in the detail ! ✝️👁️🌈🎱😹
No, we were NOT connected to Indonesia by a land bridge when the first people arrived here.
If we were there would be monkeys and tigers and elephants here too. The Wallace Line explains that.
@@Terrence-gm2ve no they forgot it, remember that bows were used in P.N.G so was farming pigs and bananas.
The key is in the artwork the bradshaw paintings were first paintings done the aboriginals call them rubbish paintings and graffiti over them then they say we were first here the only problem with that is you get better at art not worse the aboriginals probly ate the men and kept the females to breed with same as what happened with the Neanderthals in europe
Until today you can find red giant Känguru with 1,80 meter, with tail much more or in stand and 85 Kg weight!
That's insane! Wouldn't want to mess with one of those
@@Evolve.2 are you Mohammed Ali? Otherwise you would have no chance ? Go to Australia. There is some movies in the Internet.
@hmirleft5148 dude I'm Aussie. 1.2m and 85kg is small. The big fellas are around 2m tall and weigh near 120kg of pure, lean muscle. They used to have travelling boxing carnivals where you could box against kangaroos.... Ahhh the good old days....🤣
@@ThaMassDebater you Australians are a wild bunch! Hahahaha
That's not how to spell Kangaroo mate.... and they get much bigger than that too lol
How did people get to the Hawaiian islands?
It started out at 20,000 then 40,000 , 60,000 the numbers keep getting bigger,it doesn’t matter how long they were here. Look at what the people in other parts of the world did and built in the same time.
I know, that's what amazes me, that over 60 k years or whatever, no advancement. No pots or pans even, just throw the meat or fish straight on the fire. No clothing, no house, nothing.
@johnrogers5824 Honestly? The oldest civilisations back then all disappeared. But Australian aboriginals culture is based on totally different ideals on how to live with the land and not on it. They had laws, territories, understanding of genetics, how to travel vast distances (even a songline that you could follow to cross the continent from east coast to west coast. They had international trade and took active role in land care. Every plant had a unique purpose and most have medicinal qualities. They had areas to grow different foods they needed. They didn’t need permanent towns or cities as they realised they needed to travel their land at different times to obtain their food and do land care. They knew that you couldn’t marry those with the same skin name as themselves and that was due to understanding genetics. They had ‘families’ with different mobs to keep the genetics clean and healthy. Try educating yourself about the oldest living culture before you make yourself look ignorant
@@leeannedowdell2110 Keep up that narrative if it makes you happy, but don't infer I am ignorant, as it promotes an obtuseness toward an ad hominem and ergo a detraction and degeneration.
Your Indigenous Studies 101 are all well and good, but my experiences over the decades tell me a different narrative. Maybe find some old movie reels to expand your views.
I find it amusing this Welcome to Country rubbish, and also copying the Haka at footy matches that started appearing in competition to NZers.
I bet you read Bruce Pasce's writings.
@@johnrogers5825 because ‘limited personal knowledge’ is far better than scientific information. Keep up holding your limited views.
@@leeannedowdell2110 interesting ideas you have about old civilisations disappearing, I don’t think they disappeared but rather,evolved technically over a long time. All ancient people started out on the same foot, no houses, no farming, no written language and so on but over a vast time span through ingenuity most civilisations advanced technically to what we have today. Australia has some of the worlds most abundant natural resources, coal, iron, gold and many many more. As an example, look at the Chinese, they have natural resources and have been using them for thousands of years. So you must see old civilisations did not disappear but technically advanced over a long period. The early aborigines did not advance. Had not the English found and settled Australia, or any other advanced country found or settled Australia, then the aboriginal people would be today, as they were one thousand years ago.
The was never a land bridge. The evidence is the Wallace line, look it up.
Now for my contraversial statements. Homo Erectus was there first, Java man dates to 700 000 thousand years ago. By the time Homo Sapiens arrived in the area 50 000 years ago, Homo Erectus had evolved into Homo Denisovian, with a larger brain. If this seems a stretch, we have supposedly only been around for 60 000 years, Erectus has had over 500 000 years to evolve. My main reason to say this, you can not have ocean crossing of more than 100 kilometers on primitive rafts. Archeologists are not open ocean sailors. Remember any evidence of wooden boats from 100 000 years ago will have long vanished. So I contend that when Homo Sapiens turned up and bred with Denisovians, they went sailing to Australia.
Who says you can't cross nearly 100km of sea in canoes? Yes it's very hard and challenging but as long as you build it right and the weather is good it's quite possible
My speculation is based on the amount of time that Erectus had to develop seafaring. Sapiens developed sailing in 10 000 years, Erectus was around for 1 000 000 years.
There is also evidence around that there were people on Australia 120 000 years ago, and also in South America. To me that leans to Seafaring with sails.
Very interesting may have been beyond the scope of this video However didn’t mention change of flora caused by human settlement and the introduction of fire for hunting etc
Leading to gums eucalyptus etc dominating our environment inc many native plants relying now on fire for germination.
However loved the video and does make me want to delve into our aboriginal past.
All the best
Lewis
Sydney
Australia 🇦🇺
Thanks for the feedback. I haven't done too much research into change in flora, but it sounds super interesting!
Because that theory has been proven wrong lol
I really enjoyed your scientific and unbiased approach to answer this puzzling question - until I saw Graham Hancock’s picture at the end. Why?
That video discusses the arguments for and against the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis. He is one of the leading figures in the "for" side of the debate. Part of being unbiased is to explore all sides, even the ones that we don't agree with!
@ you talk about the oldest EVIDENCE in your title. There is not a shred of evidence for Hancock’s imaginative stories. None. He is not an archeologist. He is a writer who combines archeological phenomena with mythology. That’s fine, but don’t have him at the table when you want to discuss fact-based archeology and anthropology. There is a clear distinction between knowledge and believe, and instead of fanciful speculations it’s okay to admit ‘we just don’t know’. But I guess that doesn’t sell as many books or gets as many eyeballs.
@@Walter-gi9bz If you watch the video, I provide citations from researchers aside from Hancock
@@Evolve.2 I live in NSW/Australia and I’m a trained researcher, so in many ways your piece on this topic is close to my heart and greatly appreciated. You did such a thorough job with your evidence based approach of the many questions and I learned a lot during your presentation. Personally, the escape from the Toba volcanic eruption is a plausible theory. That there is a 30,000 year discrepancy in the dating methods is concerning and a problem in itself. I haven’t looked at your other pieces yet, however seeing Hancock’s image at the end of your great presentation is like watching a well resourced documentary on the evolution of horses and ending it with an image of a unicorn.
I doubt they travelled here, the land itself travelled here, they just travelled with it.
People aren't going to move from a good place if they don't have to. Why expend the resources? I think they were 'pushed'. G
We were in either the first or second dispersion out of Africa and genetics show we definitely stopped in India, on our way to the land mass known as Australia today
DNA from India can only be from between 5000 to 6000 years ago, funny how it matches the introduction of the dingo and the use of fine capped small stone tools. but let's say 50,000 to 60,000 instead.
@bkeckk nope lol
Genetic testing provides no 'pure' point of reference for Aboriginal identity, especially given the history of colonisation in Australia. Scientists cannot now recover the control data that establishes the set of Indigenous genetic traits at contact.
@liamgilham either we were in the 2 dispersions out of Africa or we are the people created before Adam and Eve in the Bible, take your pick.
@@BoydKyle-s1c not necessarily... theres alao a newer theory that hominids evolved in more than one continent - ie also had early hominids developing and then interbreeding later on....
@@liamgilham there is no pure point my statement was %11 Indian DNA for samples across Australia in largest study done in country, it's also can be no older than 5000 odd years ago, same time frame as dingo and fine small, capped stone tools 1st appeared in country
Take a hair from Pasco's whiskers.
Re out of Africa ..very old continent placement had Australia next to Africa
Time of separation wrong ... trees and minerals moved, people didnt
I would absolutely 💯 love more on the subject of Australian and Papuan history and culture and….everything you can find ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
I'm trying to find a balance between all of the different cultures and periods around the world, but I will definitely do more on Australia in the future
Good ole Taipan
I understood the number was 80,000 rather than 300,000, the age factor is incorrect as is evolution,. The difficulty I have with this is that Australia was part of the once single continent as was India and the Australian Aboriginals like some in India stem from the Negroid peoples of Africa. The original Australian Aboriginals, the Mungo People [ the Morori's of NZ were related were not fully associated with the current Aboriginals for many migrated to Australia about 4000 years ago. But there I stop.
They recently found Australian aboriginal dna in America
I've read about this and plan to incorporate it into an upcoming video!
That was my mate Bruce on his gap year holiday 😂
Also India
@Daz-ty6bo no they didn't lol
Genetic testing provides no 'pure' point of reference for Aboriginal identity, especially given the history of colonisation in Australia. Scientists cannot now recover the control data that establishes the set of Indigenous genetic traits at contact.2
@@liamgilhamtechnically we all shared the same DNA at one point
Australia should breed Kangaroo's on mass to eat 😋 What a wasted opportunity 😢
I don't know if you're joking, but kangaroos don't need to be bred. There are massive amounts of kangaroos to the point that they are considered a pest in some areas. They are also used for food. They are delicious and one of the leanest meats you will find...
@@ThaMassDebater Why are these not used instead of Beef or Pigs then?
@paulfri1569 good question. It is a gamey meat which some people don't like. I think some people have a moral stance. It is our national animal on our national emblem and they are shot when hunted. It's not mass marketed either. I personally could live off it, but my wife doesn't want to know about it...
@@ThaMassDebater I see 🤔 Australia be the perfect place to have huge Kangaroo farms as they're use to the climate and Australia on a winner here if they had better Marketing people's 🥩
@paulfri1569 unless you build extra high and extra strong expanses of fencing (super expensive), you can't really "keep" or farm kangaroos...
They jump over the regular cow and sheep fencing.
It's more commercially viable to have the farmers, cull them on their own properties. There are companies that commercially "produce" kangaroo for supermarket and export. Most of our grocery stores, especially our big chains do stock roo meat...
Aboriginals didnt come to australia by canoe. They walked here. They had only the most primitive tools... think stones and sticks. No metal working, no wheels, no footwear, no dwellings, no agriculture
They also have unique genetic markers that are missing in most of the rest of the human race (aboriginals are not the only race like this, Tibetans and others have such unique markers as well).
@@tablescissors funny thing about their DNA it has Indian markers (M 42 a and b mitochondrial DNA markers) that can only be from 5000 years ago found in Victorian, Queensland, West Australia and South Australian Aboriginals in the largest DNA study done to date, it also matches up with the change found in stone tools, the introduction of the dingo (who had to be brought over by canoe with man because a lack of Landbridge's at that time), but it's always pushed aside because it doesn't match up with the made-up history(fantasy) spread today
Well you've obviously never heard of the Wallice Line that separates Australia from the rest of the world. You couldn't possibly walk to Australia 60,000 years ago ! Same today.... ofcourse they had seafaring canoes. Aboriginal people were the first ocean farers. Get over it.
They did farm fish re evaluate
@@terrypanayiotou3485 catching fish in traps is not farming, its fishing, there was no farming by Aboriginal Australians, Facts not fiction...
Why Damarri killed his brother. Vices.
Hey, who you mob?
Just a big add
Fancy an American telling us what we already know!! 🥴🥴
The ABC may suit you better.
Denisovans?
How we found what we call evil the other guy or gal doing ? Thus a reason to blame them . If not teally you running better. If you then chasing them out better ?
You mentioned the unmentionable.....Yuval Noah Harari . Transhumanism and evolution ???
Got no time for WEF creeps. Also much of what he says about early humans in unproven old hat.
Harari's cognitive revolution probably never existed. Homo erectus was already crossing long stretches of ocean to colonize Indonesian islands, neanderthals were already making art in Europe and human ancestors had been migrating across continents for the last 2 million years, so none of the examples of that revolution was and invention of that period. It was probably a much more gradual and quantitative rather than qualitative change.
I agree! it was a change in degree, not type.
First of all, there aren't any long stretches of ocean between the Indonesian islands and the mainland. Secondly, Homo erectus didn't have to cross ANY stretch of ocean. They walked there. During glacial periods of the current ice age, the sea level was lower and the Indonesian islands were part of the mainland.
@@MultiRationalThinker They MOSTLY walked, but they would have had to cross water at the Wallace Line. It's 250m deep and a major barrier point with the evolution of species. Only 1 small island has species from both Asia and Australasia represented.
@@MultiRationalThinker Flores
@@juanlapuente833 If you believe the cognitive revolution never existed as a distinct event, what do you think are the most important factors that contributed to human cognitive and cultural development over time?
some feedback.
while interesting it’s presented rather drably.
the stock footage doesn’t always match the topic being discussed.
doesn’t get to the point quickly enough, too much slow imparting of facts.
also think that the sea level was lower at the time they arrived, it was possible to walk to Tasmania or PNG.
Also you didn’t warn first nations people they may see deceased individuals when they watch this which I believe is required for such videos.
Thanks for the feedback! Always looking to make improvements to my videos, so I will take this all into consideration in the future.
@@Evolve.2maybe ask some of us aboriginal Australians to fact check first.....
Australia the bum hole of the world.
Try explaining this to all religious people of the world
Depends where u draw the line deniaovans were able to breed with humans and prolly made it to papua long before 70 thousand years ago
Doesn’t explain why the last 3 South American sisters in Patagonia from the original South Americans, when genetically tested were more closely related to Tasmanian aboriginals than anyone else. Showing a common ancestor.
Also why the first temples in turkey depict aboriginal art.
Why was bread making technology used in Australia thousands of years before it was used in the fertile cresent?
When aboriginals in Tasmania didn’t even wear cloths in a cold environment and could catch seafood naked in cold temperatures they are called primitive. But when a white European can do it he is called superhuman.
The genetic connection to South America is super interesting. Going to make a video on that at some point!
There are no Australian aboriginal symbols in Turkey or gobeki tepe.... the symbols are NOT the same. There is no connection, just poor and misleading "research" by you.
@Evolve.2 you can't even use DNA to prove aboriginal identity, so don't believe this shit
Its All Guess Work.