Awwww, its like killing Bambi!
Posted on 02/25/2003 4:46:54 PM PST by blam
Contact: Joel Schwarz
joels@u.washington.edu
206-543-2580
University of Washington
Evidence acquits Clovis people of ancient killings, archaeologists say
Archaeologists have uncovered another piece of evidence that seems to exonerate some of the earliest humans in North America of charges of exterminating 35 genera of Pleistocene epoch mammals. The Clovis people, who roamed large portions of North America 10,800 to 11,500 years ago and left behind highly distinctive and deadly fluted spear points, have been implicated in the exterminations by some scientists.
Now researchers from the University of Washington and Southern Methodist University who examined evidence from all suggested Clovis-age killing sites conclude that there is no proof that people played a significant role in causing the extinction of Pleistocene mammals in the New World. Climate change, not humans, was the culprit.
"Of the 76 localities with asserted associations between people and now-extinct Pleistocene mammals, we found only 14 (12 for mammoth, two for mastodon) with secure evidence linking the two in a way suggestive of predation," write Donald Grayson of the UW and David Meltzer of SMU in the current issue of the Journal of World Prehistory. "This result provides little support for the assertion that big-game hunting was a significant element in Clovis-age subsistence strategies. This is not to say that such hunting never occurred: we have clear evidence that proboscideans (mammoths and mastodons) were taken by Clovis groups. It just did not occur very often."
To locate Clovis-age sites that suggested hunting of now-extinct mammals Grayson and Meltzer used FAUNMAP, an electronic database that documents the distribution of mammals in North America during the last 40,000 years. The search excluded areas above the North American ice sheet and sites that were pre- and post-Clovis because it is the Clovis people who have been targeted by proponents of the so-called "overkill" hypothesis.
This search turned up 75 locations in the United States and one in Canada that Grayson and Meltzer evaluated. Forty-seven of the sites did not exhibit minimally acceptable evidence showing an association between artifacts and extinct mammals. Most of these sites were rejected because they were not sufficiently described or documented.
"In many cases there is no published material, and when something is not published we are not able to weigh evidence of a human connection," said Grayson. "In other cases there was just an anecdotal suggestion of artifacts or remains, or there were very sketchy drawings."
Of the remaining 29 sites only 14 survived closer study. To determine this, the researchers looked for settings in which artifacts and animal remains were so closely associated that there was little doubt that their relationship was not accidental. In addition, Grayson and Meltzer searched published evidence for signs of human hunting and butchering and processing. This included cases where projectile points were found among bones or where there was solid evidence of human-caused bone breakage or cut marks.
Mammoth and mastodon bones were the most commonly found remains at the 14 confirmed predation sites, but horse, camel and bison bones also were identified. However, Grayson said there was no evidence that the two horse bones and one camel bone, all from extinct genera, came from animals that had been hunted by humans. There was quite a bit of evidence of human predation of bison, but this genus did not become extinct.
The survey produced no evidence that humans hunted the 33 other genera of extinct animals, which also include sloths, tapirs, bears and sabertooth cats. In fact, only 15 genera can be shown to have survived beyond 12,000 years ago and into Clovis times, said Grayson.
"There is absolutely no evidence that Clovis people were involved with 33 of the extinct genera. Where's the spear point sticking out of a camel or a ground sloth? If you can kill a mammoth you can kill a lumbering ground sloth. Clovis people absolutely did not chase these now-extinct animals relentlessly across the North American landscape," he said.
"The bottom line is that we need to stop wasting our time looking at people as the cause of these extinctions. We suspect the extinctions were driven by climate change. We need to know what aspects of climate change were involved. We have to tackle this species by species, one at a time, and look at the interaction of each species with the climate and vegetation on the ground."
Take a good look at the Carribean and Gulf Coast regions. Also, the North Atlantic. Blam, the Solutrean and Clovis cultures may be related as well. Could Cro Magnons following the North Atlantic ice pack in search of seals and giant auks have made it to North America? With sea levels down so low, the distance appears to be not so daunting.
Awwww, its like killing Bambi!
Yes. I have it bookmarked, one of my favorites. Some things to notice, no Persian Gulf, landlocked Red Sea, land bridges across the Mediterranean.....and if you'll look real close around the Bahamas, you can see..impact craters?
Now, all the articles I have read regarding the Ice Age say the ocean levels declined by 300-500 feet. If you add another 100-200 loss of water to that map, you can see that the Gulf Of Mexico probably becomes landlocked.
My theory is that the 'underwater city' off the coast of Cuba was in fact built on the coast of a much dessicated Gulf Of Mexico then later the land bridges burst and re flooded the Gulf putting the city waaay underwater.
What is a Capoid? I read that they were Mongoloid. The San Bushmen are physically different than other people everywhere. The males have a perpetual semi-erect penis and the females have a unique skin 'apron' over the genetial area. The Ancient Egyptians recorded this difference too.
My son gave me a book 12-25-90 titled, Our Kind, by Marvin Harris (bless his soul)...and I've been going at it since then. No formal studies, mind you.
We're talking about wanting to exterminate a whole species of animal off of North America. Now, it would be one thing if Indian ancestors had ever spread out the way we do and occupied every square inch of the teritory, but they didn't do that. They lived in little bands.
Suppose that I get together with 200 people who hate turtles and devise a plan to eliminate turtles from North America. By your reckoning I and my band could walk across North Amrica killing every turtle we see in about two years, but is that going to get the job done? Won't the turtles just repopulate the areas we pass through as soon as we're gone?
CAPOID SUBSPECIES (Khoisanid)
Southern African subspecies of Man, including the Khoid (Hottentot) and Sanid (Bushman) races. The Khoikhoi ('men of men') number about 40,000, mainly in Namibia and the northwestern Cape Province, and are distinguished by their yellowish skin, narrow skull, and prominent malars. Historically, they have regarded themselves as superior to the San.
IIRC they are also in far north Europe and Alaska as well.
I'm of the same mind as well .... think about hunting Grizzly bears .... now thing about doing it armed only with spears. NO THANKS.
Those circles were caused by freezing--thawing--freezing, etc. Weren't they?
You are correct. Your question about their survival in areas where humans evolved is also very interesting. I disagree about Australia and possibly some other areas, though. There's strong evidence humans have been present in Australia for upwards of 60,000 years. That means they coexisted with the megafauna for at least 30,000 years. As for human presence in South Africa, mentioned in another post, this remains a very big and complicated ball of unwinding twine.
I still maintain there is absolutely no firm evidence for any of the three main theories: climate, human predation or disease. It's all just speculation.
I'm a little tired of humans being bashed as the cause of all worldly problems and disasters but I know we can be nasty customers, too. I think I view humans and human nature pretty realistically (I'm a conservative, after all). The American Indians used to hunt buffalo by driving huge numbers of them off cliffs. They used only a small amount of the meat and skins and left the rest to rot. Maybe the proto-Indians did the same with Mastadons and other large creatures. But evidence of the buffalo massacres exists. Does anyone know of similar evidence for megafauna? I'm not aware of it.
I located a couple of interesting sites that discuss the mystery pretty objectively:
http://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/Biota/megafauna_extinctions.htm
and http://www.austmus.gov.au/factsheets/megafauna.htm
If I had to choose one of the theories only I'd go with climate change. Animals adapted to glacial conditions probably didn't do so well in a suddenly warming world. But there are some hole in that theory too. It's an interesting discussion.
IMHO, those clovis-speared people didn't have the numbers nor mobilty to wipe out entire species of animals.
I go with climate change. Either a solar flare-up or a switch in the poles.
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.