Earliest evidence of humans changing ecosystems with fire

Science Daily ^ | May 5, 2021 | Yale University

[PIF]

They used fire in a way that prevented regrowth of the region’s forests, creating a sprawling bushland that exists today.

—
If humans 90,000 years ago created bush land deliberately, are they still doing it or do the practice die out many thousands of years ago, and if so why haven’t the forests returned?

Or is it a bunch of scientists having a theory and then go looking for anything that upholds that theory, while discarding all other possibilities? After all if its something to do with environment, it is a proven fact that without human intervention the environment would never change and the weather would always be perfect planet wide, right? Therefore, humans are responsible for this wanton deforestation obviously!

[SVTCobra03]

Evidence for a Young Earth and Creation

https://answersingenesis.org/creation-vs-evolution/evidence-for-young-earth-creation/

[Larry Lucido]

So they are the original bushmen? I wonder if Elaine would have knocked them off for their sandals? She would have to lay off the poppy seeds and watch the English Patient first.

[Doctor DNA]

Interesting. Also proves there were no Rhinoceros there to put out those fires!

[Paal Gulli]

Australia has at least two species of bird that use fire to change their ecosystem. It’s the only (known) animal other than man to use fire constructively.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Salman. While checking for earlier stories about this (sounded familiar), found instead that the Lake Malawi keyword is pretty interesting.

[dinodino]

Stone can absolutely be dated, especially if it was heated by fire—archaeomagnetic dating.

[Carriage Hill]

Archaeomagnetic dating is a method of dating iron-bearing sediments that have been superheated — for example, the clay lining of an ancient hearth.

For radiocarbon dating to be possible, the material must once have been part of a living organism. This means that things like stone, metal and pottery cannot usually be directly dated by this means unless there is some organic material embedded or left as a residue.

To establish the age of a rock or a fossil, researchers use some type of clock to determine the date it was formed. Geologists commonly use radiometric dating methods, based on the natural radioactive decay of certain elements such as potassium and carbon, as reliable clocks to date ancient events.

Geologists do not use carbon-based radiometric dating to determine the age of rocks. Carbon dating only works for objects that are younger than about 50,000 years, and most rocks of interest are older than that. ... Over time, carbon-14 decays radioactively and turns into nitrogen.

[dinodino]

I know all that. We are talking about ancient fires here.

[Carriage Hill]

The surviving charcoal, and other organic materials/fossils in the firepit can be dated, but not the actual rocks.

[dinodino]

Yes, the rocks can be dated, due to the baked-in magnetic fields.

[ckilmer]

When the English first sailed up and down the coast of north america —they reported that sometimes it looked like the whole continent was on fire.

The Indians were burning away the underbrush in the forest. This enabled grass to grow under the trees which was food for deer buffalo and elk—plus rabbits and other small game.

This made the the forests of the eastern seaboard look like parks.

Indians in the midwest did the same thing as did the california indians.

The Indians were forest managers.