Note: this topic was posted 8/25/2002.Thanks sarcasm.
Posted on 08/25/2002 1:26:45 AM PDT by sarcasm
DALLAS — The skull of a teenage girl from the Gulf Coast could be the oldest human remains ever found in Texas. Scientists are debating the age of the skull, unearthed last year in a muddy ditch near Freeport, in Brazoria County. Preliminary analysis suggests that the fossil could date back nearly 11,000 years.
If so, the skull would be among the oldest human bones known in North America, from a time when, the theory goes, the first Americans had just arrived across a land bridge from Asia.
Some experts have questioned the 11,000-year date, based on a single radiocarbon analysis done at an Arizona laboratory.
"It's possible that the skull is that old," said Michael Collins, an archaeologist at the University of Texas, Austin. "But under the circumstances, you can put zero confidence in it."
Still, the discovery could be profoundly significant for understanding the earliest Americans, scientists said.
"Each observation, each burial, each skeleton becomes invaluable in showing humanity's heritage," said D. Gentry Steele, a Texas A&M University archaeologist who was involved in the excavation.
The skull's fate rests in the hands of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, on whose land the bones were found, and area American Indian tribes. By law, any federally recognized tribe that can prove cultural affiliation with prehistoric remains wins the right to rebury them.
The Fish and Wildlife Service is notifying tribes of the discovery, a spokesman said.
Hanging over the process is the specter of Kennewick Man, a 9,200-year-old skeleton found in Washington state in 1996. That discovery evolved into a years-long legal battle between Indians, who want to rebury the bones, and scientists.
Steele is one of eight scientists who sued nearly six years ago for scientific access to Kennewick Man. A U.S. District Court judge in Portland is expected to rule this week.
Robert d'Aigle, the Houston archaeologist who excavated the Brazoria County skull, said he didn't want the find to become Texas' version of Kennewick Man.
"I used that as a template for what to do and what not to do," he said. D'Aigle is even receiving legal advice from one of the Kennewick plaintiffs' attorneys.
The Brazoria story began in April 1999, when workers uncovered the skull and other remains while building a levee in San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge. Suspecting that it was human, they covered it with plastic and clay and left it for two years.
But Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires archaeological investigation of such remains, so d'Aigle arrived in spring 2001 to study them.
"We knew very early on that the remains were much older than anything found before," he said.
A survey of the site's geology suggested that the bones could be more than 5,000 years old, d'Aigle said.
After notifying the Alabama-Coushatta tribe of his work, he unearthed the skull, some jawbone fragments, two vertebrae and a fragment of the left shoulder bone.
Steele concluded that they belonged to an adolescent or young adult female. So far, there aren't enough remains to determine whether they resemble recent American Indians or other similarly ancient skulls, he said.
The oldest-known human remains in Texas include a skeleton from the Wilson-Leonard site, northwest of Austin, and one from a site near Midland. Both could be more than 10,000 years old, although the dating on the Midland site isn't well established, said David Meltzer, an archaeologist at Southern Methodist University. (Other archaeological evidence, such as stone artifacts, suggests the presence of humans in Texas even earlier.)
The age estimate of 10,700 years on the Brazoria County discovery remains a problem.
That number comes from the University of Arizona's well-respected radiocarbon dating laboratory, to which d'Aigle sent a tiny sample of bone. But the test was performed on a much smaller piece than ideal.
"When you have that little carbon, the potential for misadventures is great," UT's Collins said.
Other tests were run on soil found inside the skull. Thomas Stafford, a Colorado expert on radiocarbon dating, found that soil to be roughly 5,000 years old.
There are many reasons why the soil and bone could have different ages, Stafford said. But with only one date for each, it's hard to tell which if either might be the true date for when the young woman lived.
"Anything this incredible should be tested over and over again," he said.
D'Aigle said he tried to get more dates for the skull, but some of the tests did not work. Others were not done because the Fish and Wildlife Service couldn't provide the extra money needed.
The bones now lie in refrigerated storage in one of d'Aigle's labs. The Fish and Wildlife Service has no plans to dig for more bones, said its spokesman, although d'Aigle thinks that much more of the skeleton may be there.
The bones could go to a museum if not claimed by tribes.
Skeletal Remains May Be 11,000 Years Old (Lake Jackson, Texas)
Should say: By law, any federally recognized tribe that claims cultural affiliation with prehistoric remains wins the right to rebury them.
If so, the skull would be among the oldest human bones known in North America, from a time when, the theory goes, the first Americans had just arrived across a land bridge from Asia.
I wonder if some may say that Arbusto (Bush) could be the name?......
Note: this topic was posted 8/25/2002.Thanks sarcasm.
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.
