Stone tools in India suggest earlier human exit from Africa

Phys Org ^ | January 31, 2018 | Malcolm Ritter

[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.

[SunkenCiv]

Stone tools in India suggest earlier human exit from Africa

s/b

Stone tools in India suggest earlier human exit TO Africa

[TXnMA]

It's been a long time since I last considered the Calico artifact/geofact samples. Now that I've done so, I see that they meet most of the criteria / characteristics I disscussed in my #19 on this thread

In fact, there are hints at progression into a higher level of lithic technology in this Calico "geofact":

That "lipped striking platform" on the left looks very much as if that entire flake were detached with a single blow from a "soft hammer" (bone or antler "billet" or "baton" or soft limestone hammer)...

(Before age degraded my hand-eye coordination, I claimed to be able to make "as good a projectile point as any but the most masterful Indian". And, given suitable material, I could replicate essentially any stone tool made on this continent.)

When you've "broken as much rock" as I have, you find it quite difficult to attribute objects like the Calico artifacts to random, natural forces.

Sitting behind a desk and pontificating proves little to nothing. Try it yourself; bust some rock. You'll learn very quickly what I mean... '-)

[rktman]

But, but, but.......settled science. ;-)

[Little Bill]

Stone tools in India suggest earlier human exit TO Africa I have always thought that this was as reasonable any other argument.

[SunkenCiv]

:’)

[Cronos]

1. These could have been homo homo floriensis or some other related sub-species, not necessarily homo homo sapiens sapiens

2. Africa i.e. the horn of Africa where the species is assumed to have left was not quite the hellhole it is today. in fact Egypt, Ethiopia etc were quite well before the rise of Izlamm

[Cronos]

"If Africa is the oldest civilization, shouldn’t they be the most advanced?"

Africa is a continent, not a civilization. It'd be akin to saying "If Asia is the oldest.." or "If Europe is the oldest civilization"

The oldest civilization i.e. with cities, cultural practices such as burial, "art", tools etc. seems to be in Asia Minor with quick dispersal across the area from the Indus valley to the Nile valley

The "oldest" areas falter as either climate change or invasion from outside or just civilizational exhaustion sets in -- look at the Mayan or Indus valley for climate change (though in the case of the IV civilisation, it moved east to the Ganges-Jamuna area and south to the Tamil lands) or look at the Sumerians, succumbing to invasions by Akkadians, Amorites, Gutians, etc

All civilizations are built on the achievements of forebearing civilization -- the English alphabet for instance is derived from the Latin which comes from the Etruscan which came from the Greek which came from the Phoenician who adapted the hieroglyphs of the Sumerians.

[Cronos]

and if they are the oldest civilization then shouldn't they be the most populous?

that doesn't necessarily follow.

At different points in time different areas have been the most populous.

Both the Ganga-Jamuna-Brahmaputra and the Yellow river-Yangtze regions are very fertile and support together about 1 billion people

But 4000 years ago they were thick with jungle and vegetation and not populated. At that time the temperate river systems such as in Sumeria, Egypt and the Indus valley were the most populous

[Cronos]

True LP --prior to 1800, India accounted for 25% to 30% of world wealth creation due to its fertile lands, gold and diamond deposits and production of cotton

However the reduction of India to just 2% of world trade in 1947 was not just due to the BRitish -- the British took a lot of India's wealth yes and changed themsevles from a poor land to a rich one (what's the reckoning? They stole about a trillion dollars worth in 2015 currency?)

The izlamik invasions also crushed India and prior to this, the rise of Buddhism led to stagnation.

[21twelve]

“All civilizations are built on the achievements of forebearing civilization — the English alphabet for instance is derived from the Latin which comes from the Etruscan which came from the Greek which came from the Phoenician who adapted the hieroglyphs of the Sumerians.”

Maybe THAT’s what obama meant when he said “You didn't build it.”

(I hope no Sumerian reads this and wants reparations!)

And regarding “advanced” - it reminds me of that book entitled something like “The 2000 Year Leap” - that laid out the argument that with the successful American Revolution and the freedom, and the free enterprise - is what really made a leap in civilization.

[Cronos]

And regarding “advanced” - it reminds me of that book entitled something like “The 2000 Year Leap” - that laid out the argument that with the successful American Revolution and the freedom, and the free enterprise - is what really made a leap in civilization.

That's not accurate. There were various "leaps" in civilization - stone tools, agriculture, metal-working, horse-domestication and the industrial revolution. It was the industrial revolution that started in England that accelerated world civilizational development

And now the internet has moved it to warp-speed.

Obama's entire statement was "The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own" -- much as I dislike him that part was also correct

The problem was that he didn't recognize the individual initiative though he stated it

[MNDude]

hahaha! I was going to say that!