Thanks TXnMA.
Posted on 02/01/2018 8:17:08 AM PST by C19fan
Just a week after scientists reported evidence that our species left Africa earlier than we thought, another discovery is suggesting the date might be pushed back further. omo sapiens arose in Africa at least 300,000 years ago and left to colonize the globe. Scientists think there were several dispersals from Africa, not all equally successful. Last week's report of a human jaw showed some members of our species had reached Israel by 177,000 to 194,000 years ago. Now comes a discovery in India of stone tools, showing a style that has been associated elsewhere with our species. They were fashioned from 385,000 years ago to 172,000 years ago, showing evidence of continuity and development over that time. That starting point is a lot earlier than scientists generally think Homo sapiens left Africa.
(Excerpt) Read more at phys.org ...
;-) From whence evolved across the land bridge to Alaska to become Eskimos and “Native Americans” and Incas and Mayans, blah, blah, blah. Those ancestors? Turning garden spots into sh**holes for centuries.
Nah - this ‘suggests’ more evidence of alien tampering...
</s>
Vorlon Empire.
That’s Schiff-hole
If they thought India was better, then it really must have been a shithole.
#5, lol
IOW, people have been escaping Africa forever.
Did humanity really “exit Africa?” I mean, the theory that humanity developed there first is so widely accepted, and repeated by every “scientist” and especially media commentator, I wonder if opposing evidence that disproves that theory might be simply ignored.
If Africa is the oldest civilization, shouldn’t they be the most advanced?
You can thank the Brits for putting India on the path to s#ithole-dom. Prior to the age of colonization, India was one of the wealthiest regions on the planet.
“If Africa is the oldest civilization, shouldn’t they be the most advanced?”
They’re hiding in Wakanda so we won’t steal their science.
Science is always up for revision. No scientist would say for *SURE* that humanity developed there, only that at this point the evidence is so. all any reputable scientist will say is that ‘as of now, the most reliable evidence seems to confirm *this* theory’.
It’s the kind of thing that confuses some who are critical of science (no you, but some of my friends), just like the common misunderstanding of what they word ‘theory’ means in a scientific sense.
“Hey dude, lets get the eff outta here!!!”
“Out of Africa, that is.”
“If they thought India was better, then it really must have been a shithole.”
India has some pretty nice areas, but overall, yea.
... and if they are the oldest civilization then shouldn't they be the most populous?
Did Humans Evolve In Europe Rather Than Africa? We Don't Have The Answer Just Yet
As a lithic technologist, I'll agree that all the pictured artifacts are, indeed, artifacts -- and not "accidental geofacts".
All of them are "faceted", from multiple, purposeful flake removals, and many removals show clear evidence of a "hard hammer" (aka "hammerstone") strike.
A further, convincing point is that the materials are granular, tough materials that will only produce a thin, sharp flake when submitted to well-directed, high velocity, shockwave-initiating percussive strikes. Such precise impacts are exceedingly rare in nature -- and multiple such strikes on a single small stone are so improbable as to be essentially non-existent in nature.
And, several of them even exhibit prepared "striking platforms" for flake removals!
Whoever made them may have been "primitive" -- but, they definitely exhibited technical knowledge and skill.
~~~~~~~~~~
(To anyone who thinks otherwise -- I challenge you to pick up some rocks and duplicate these "crude" artifacts...) '-)
Thanks TXnMA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
