AMERICAN ORIGIN OF HOMO SAPIENS?

[DrFidelius]

You now glee, I find that going out onto the sidewalk like a carnie barker is in poor taste. I assume that anyone interested in the topic has been participating in the thread already, its not as if Phaedrus and I are the only two there. I would not dream of advertising for more viewers; I am not in the habit of performing for an audience.

[glee]

DrFidelius,
Sorry, I’m confused.

I was objecting to Phaedrus’ post immdediately above mine, in which he implied:

• only he and you were discussing evolution (there’s lots of us involved; Phaedrus won’t supply evidence to back up his claims)

• it would be enjoyable (most of the thread is Phaedrus saying how he will supply information soon and arguing over the rules for the ‘discussion’)

I was trying to warn people that the thread is tedious, and isn’t an informed discussion of evolution.

Surely Phaedrus is doing the ‘advertising’?

[Doobieous]

About the Monte Verde site: I heard somewhere ( I think it was on the Discovery Channel news briefs page, not too sure), that the remains found there seem to be more of a south east Asian origin than a north east Asian origin. True? Anyway, if I am wrong, I probably am thinking of something else…

[tomndebb]

egkelly:

Chatwin was visiting the Argentine city of Comodoro Rivadavia, in the northern end of the area referred to as Patagonia. He stopped at the Salesian College, and interviewed (Father) manuel Palacios. . . I would like to verify this, however I don’t know of any way to contact this college.

My impression is that since this school http://www.isestf.edu.ar/ appears to be the only Salesian institution of higher learning in Patagonia and I can find only these two other schools in Patagonia-- http://www.barranco-cortes.com/ (a law college?) and http://www.patagonia.net.ar/colmed (a med school) and only the law college is near Comodoro Rivadavia–on this index of all the universities of the world http://www.braintrack.com/ , my guess about Chatwin’s accuracy may have been correct.

Feel free to look these sites over for anything that I’m missing. (Did Chatwin actually name the school?)

---

Tom~

[DrFidelius]

glee:

I’m sorry if I wasn’t very clear. I was calling Phaedrus the “carnie barker,” and was trying to indicate my disgruntlement (is that a word?).

[glee]

DrFidelius,

Thanks for clarifying!

(And yes - ‘disgruntlement’ is in the dictionary)

---

In the bathtub of history, the truth is harder to hold than the soap… (Pratchett)

[glee]

Phaedrus,

I haven’t got your e-mail address, and I’ve given up on the ‘flat earth’ thread, so hope it’s OK to contact you here.

Your last post in the above thread was polite and contained an clear assertion, so I’d like to respond.

You said:

‘…glee: I am sad at your leaving but I believe it points to the fact that you cannot believe anything other than evolution is true. If you have such a vested interest, there is nothing that anyone can tell you that will make you stay other than to say that they agree with you…’

Well I disagree strongly with this. I believe in a lot of things, such as Gravity, Australia, politeness and even aliens*. However I’m willing to change my views on ANY scientific theory when new evidence contradicts it. For example, if God manifests himself and explains that he ‘planted’ the evidence for evolution, then I’ll happily accept it.**

I’m not a biologist, but I understand that there is fossil evidence and gene discoveries which can be explained by the current theory of evolution. It doesn’t WORRY me whether it’s true or not - I just like to know scientific methods have been used.

You tell me that a lawyer has written a book (which you are unable to summarise any points from - apparently I have to read the whole thing), and that a New Age book (which both you and I agree is unscientific) also ‘refutes’ evolution. Since there is no new evidence, I don’t see why I need to change my beliefs at present.

*I have no direct evidence of aliens. Astronomers tell me there are a vast number of stars and some stars have planets, and I know there is life on this planet, so I believe the probability is high that there are other life-forms in the Universe.

**I’m a keen chess player. The ending King + 2 Bishops v King and Knight has been considered drawn for over 100 years. Recently a computer database proved it was a win (in up to 225 moves!). Instantly, my beliefs changed - that’s how easy it is.

[jab1]

I clipped an article from the local paper (The Los Angeles Daily News) two weeks ago (11-1-99) and I’ve been wanting to use it:

First Americans may have crossed the Atlantic

SANTA FE, N.M.-- In a radical new view of prehistory, two prominent archaeologists say North America’s first inhabitants may have crossed the icy Atlantic Ocean some 18,000 years ago from Europe’s Iberian Peninsula.

The two archaeologists are Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley. Stanford is the anthropology curator at the Smithsonian Institution. Bradley is an independent researcher from Cortez, Colorado. They made their theory public at an archaeology conference in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Their theory is that a group called the Solutreans (I’ve never heard of Solutrea. Is it part of the Iberian peninsula: Spain, Portugal and a bit of France?) originally settled the Eastern seaboard and that over the next six thousand years, spread their hunter/gatherer culture

as far as the American deserts and Canadian tundra, and perhaps into South America.

The article mentions that the Clovis culture seems to have originated 13,500 years ago, which is why the new claim is “radical”. It also points out that Clovis-type “weapons have been found in digs nationwide.”

Stanford and Bradley concede that the Solutreans

may not have been the only paleo-explorers to reach the Western Hemisphere.

But judging by their distinctive style of projection points and other clues in the archaeological record, they may have been the first settlers who brought to North America what, until now, has been considered the Clovis culture.

“There is very little in Clovis - in fact, nothing - that is not found in Solutrea,” said Stanford. “Their blades are virtually indistinguishable.”

Other scientists say the Solutrean alternative is such a radical departure that it might take years to adequately evaluate. Stanford and Bradley’s new explanation, they noted, is based primarily on comparisons of projectile points and other artifacts already discovered on both sides of the Atlantic.

So, there is an alternative to the commonly-accepted theory of who the first inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere were. And while 18,000 years ago is more radical than 13,500, it’s far more reasonable than 100,000 years ago.

---

Fighting my own ignorance since 1957.

[Polycarp]

Each culture is named after the (usually small) community nearest which their remains were found, so that the Chateauperronian culture was found near Chateau Perro(n), the Magdalenian near La Madeleine ( with reversion to the Latin form for ease of adjective construction), etc. I don’t offhand remember the origin of Solutrean, but I would expect it was from a site named after a town with a name something like Solutré.

[jab1]

Thanks, Poly.

---

Fighting my own ignorance since 1957.