Panga ya Saidi is actually a network of caves about a kilometer long in limestone hills: the main chamber is about 100 square meters (1,076 square feet) co-author Prof. Michael Petraglia of the Max Planck Institute tells Haaretz. It was used from the Middle Stone Age to this day, though people don’t live in it any more: now they use it for burials and rituals, he says. In any case, it was big enough to have supported hundreds of people....
At Panga ya Saidi, tools go back to the earliest occupation 78,000 years ago. But the occupants’ technology changed markedly 67,000 years ago, with smaller, finer implements appearing, reflecting changes in hunting practices and skills.
After that turning point, the archaeologists observed a mix of technologies rather than sudden changes. That argues against a series of cognitive or cultural "revolutions" theorized by some archaeologists, they write....
११ मे, २०१८
"Cave Found in Kenya in Which People Lived for 78,000 Years/Unique discoveries in tropical forest cave show gradual development of weapons and other skills, negating the theory of sudden spurts of innovation."
Haaretz reports.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४८ टिप्पण्या:
I guess it all depends on what you mean by "Gradual". For example, the change from the Bow and arrow to the Musket was abrupt. How else could it have happened?
OTOH, they've been gradual changes in horseback riding. Stirrups, bridles, saddles, etc.
And of course, how much we're supposed to project from ONE cave in Kenya is unknown. Sample Size = 1. Universe = very large.
That argues against a series of cognitive or cultural "revolutions" theorized by some archaeologists, they write...
Or perhaps a revolution in intertribal communication, so that new knowledge spread farther and faster.
I have always been fascinated by history but in the past two decades I have become increasingly interested in the findings of prehistory. And impressed by how the improvements in archeology inform all periods
of the past.
"But the occupants’ technology changed markedly 67,000 years ago, with smaller, finer implements appearing ...
What does that argue against?
But the occupants’ technology changed markedly 67,000 years ago, with smaller, finer implements appearing, reflecting changes in hunting practices and skills
Sears opened it's first store selling fine Craftsman tools.
Ridiculous conclusions.
THESE people seemed to have slow innovation. Many other cultures did not.
When you have Stone Age people's even unto the last couple of centuries...but has Sumer, Babylon, Greece , and Western Europe going gangbusters, it sounds like Academic In-Fighting over Pet Theories to me
Yeah, these guys find one site somewhere and extrapolate an entire culture.
If the world ended tomorrow and a thousand years from now some archeologist dug up my place, they would assume everyone was handsome, virile, industrious, modest,articulate, handy with tools and extremely intelligent.
True, in my case, but some of my neighbors lacking.
From 78,00 years ago to: But the occupants’ technology changed markedly 67,000 years ago, with smaller, finer implements appearing, reflecting changes in hunting practices and skills
Saw a dog on internet who observed people buying fast food with paper money. Dog brought green leaf to counter to buy food.
Those people not near a smart as that dog.
Perhaps they lacked the intellectual firepower needed for sudden spurts of innovation? They did, after all, fail to implement the wheel.
So 2001 got it wrong and there was no monolith that spurred innovations in tool making?
"Yeah, these guys find one site somewhere and extrapolate an entire culture."
As rcocean implied, the smaller the sample size, the greater the need for wild speculation.
Archeology/anthropology is a tough gig--or very easy, depending on how you look at it.
But what do the resident creationists on the blog think?
They were trapped in their own mental prison because "white freedom" hadn't yet been invented thanks to those bad lazy white people.
smaller, finer implements appearing
I'd argue for the evolution and appearance of some proto-Japanese with their transistorized flint arrowheads with screws so small you have to be Chinese to deal with them.
Saw a dog on internet who observed people buying fast food with paper money. Dog brought green leaf to counter to buy food.
Link please, that would redefine "adorable"for me.
https://www.boredpanda.com/dog-buy-treats-leaves-negro-colombia/
The most recent "out of Africa" dispersal of modern humans started about 70,000 years ago, spreading humanity along the coast of Asia and into Australia.
Apparently there was something nice for humanity going on around 70k years ago, which promoted not only population growth enough for exploration and colonization of new lands, but also development of finer tools than had been previously used in this one site.
My theory is that well-fed kids got bored, and some started working harder on their stone chipping skills, and some got wanderlust and headed toward the sunrise. Makes as much sense as the stated "gradual advances" theory.
Thanks FM. I had hoped for video, but still, amazing.
And impressed by how the improvements in archeology inform all periods of the past.
The technology of analyzing ancient DNA is revolutionizing archeology. You should read Reich's book, "Who We Are and How We Got Here."
Come on. This is a conservative blog. There have to be at least a few creationists among the bunch here.
Shit. Even Scott Pruitt's a creationist - I just found out. It explains a lot.
Studying prehistory sounds pretty judge-y and for bigots and whatnot, being so quick to label large rock crusher communities by their own biases, as if "development" of better "tools" signifies life in the cave might have gotten better, simply because maybe more people survived.
I'm sure there's a deep thinker somewhere who would argue that all this dependence on finer rock crushing tools over the last 67,000 years means that we've lost a little of our humanity along the way.
Robert Reich wrote a book on DNA? That's cool.
I just watched the movie. Came out on blu-ray, DVD, streamed it on Netflix, etc.
The movie was better.
DNA is a very visual subject. The most eloquently anyone ever did write on it was the original Watson-Crick paper in 1953 Nature.
Complex, sophisticated information is sometimes best visualized. You'd think if anyone would understand this a surgeon might. But then again, maybe not - if he's bored.
Most 'revolutions' occurred closer to when Homo sapiens evolved, likely 100k years earlier.
Colonization of Australia happened not long after this cave was started to be used.
Dog video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z954gK4hHLY
Sounds like cultural appropriation. Someone should picket the cave.
Burned out San Jose home sells for less than a million. Damn! He who hesitates is lost. Missed out on a good deal.
https://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Jose/1375-Bird-Ave-95125/home/839287
Until folks learned to write down what they knew I can see it taking a long time for any innovation.
Written language is the key for innovation.
Colonization of Australia happened not long after this cave was started to be used.
There are remains in the Philippines that are 700,000 years old. That is really a mystery. Maybe Homo erectus ?
You'd think if anyone would understand this a surgeon might. But then again, maybe not - if he's bored.
I'm beginning that claim of a molecular biology degree was your usual bullshit.
Did you have a positive SAT?
I'm beginning that claim of a molecular biology degree was your usual bullshit.
Did you have a positive SAT?
Did you ever learn how to include verbs in your sentences, Cave Man? They really spruce up the communication! (Especially if you're looking to "pass" the verbal portion of the SAT).
Paging Dr. Dumbass.
Enjoy your weekend, Fruit Loop.
Written language is great.
High enough calorie availability for specialization is required.
Without specialization writing is next to impossible.
Readering, if you are interested, that's a good book. Ignore the MacDonalds' clerk.
Thanks, was unaware and sounds right up my alley.
The most recent "out of Africa" dispersal of modern humans started about 70,000 years ago, spreading humanity along the coast of Asia and into Australia.
Apparently there was something nice for humanity going on around 70k years ago, which promoted not only population growth enough for exploration and colonization of new lands, but also development of finer tools than had been previously used in this one site.
So the brain drain of Africa started 70,000 years ago, when the innovative moved North and East?
It certainly has some data going for it.
"sounds right up my alley."
Greg Cochran, who wrote "The 10,000 Year Explosion" which is also good but ten years old, has a blog analysis of the Reich book, which is good and free. The comments on Cochran's blog are excellent. Lots of people posting comments who are way over my head on genetics.
So the brain drain of Africa started 70,000 years ago, when the innovative moved North and East?
There is a school thought that AMH, Anatomically Modern Humans, may have evolved in the middle east and migrated to Africa, replacing the more primitive version and also going to Europe and Asia.
Wow. 10,000 years ago. Wonder what happened then, Special K.
Yep. Pretty recent that they figured out that's when agriculture sort of changed things. Really ground-breaking stuff, there.
There is a school thought that AMH, Anatomically Modern Humans, may have evolved in the middle east and migrated to Africa, replacing the more primitive version and also going to Europe and Asia.
Right. What a school that is. Is it the same school that you went to so you could learn that lifelong opioid addiction was great way to treat chronic pain?
Special K. is always decades behind and hundreds of thousands of dollars short. Unless the Khoi San bush people were in the Middle East, then that bullshit above was just some more shit he spouted off so he could pretend to sound smart. Same with the chronic pain opioid BS he posted.
The dude might as well be a fucking creationist. Now there's a "school of thought" that would align with his capabilities.
Lots of people posting comments who are way over my head on genetics.
Considering whose head that is, it must be a pretty low clearance.
I just read an article that says around 70.000 years ago there was a major volcanic eruption that caused major climate change to an already cold world. It makes the supposition that humans nearly went extinct, dropping to as low as 40 breeding pairs of humans.
https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2012/10/22/163397584/how-human-beings-almost-vanished-from-earth-in-70-000-b-c
Pretty much everyone agrees that the climate became much worse for humans, driving them nearly into extinction and spurring migration out of Africa around 70,000 years ago.
So a smaller population, living in a tougher climate could explain the incrementalism.
The science is settled.
Gahrie, there is some disagreement on the Toba Event.
Their analysis discovered that a thin layer of ash in this sediment about 90 feet (27 m) below the lake floor was from the last of the Toba eruptions, known as Youngest Toba Tuff.
"The Toba super-eruption dispersed huge volumes of ash across much of the Indian Ocean, Indian Peninsula and South China Sea," Lane said. "We have discovered the layer of volcanic ash was carried about twice the distance as previously thought, over more than 7,000 kilometers [4,350 miles]."
The amount of ash found in the Malawi sediment core (a cylindrical log of sediment drilled from the ground), was more than the scientists expected to find.
And
As for what might explain the near-extinction humanity apparently once experienced, perhaps another kind of catastrophe, such as disease, hit the species. It may also be possible that such a disaster never happened in the first place — genetic research suggests modern humans descend from a single population of a few thousand survivors of a calamity, but another possible explanation is that modern humans descend from a few groups that left Africa at different times.
This is complicated. I recommend Cochran's blog about it.
He has a lot about the migrations.
Toba was not catastrophic enough to cause a genetic bottleneck. The surviving humans coped quite well due to their extensive knowledge of the productive powers of chronic opium ingestion.
Did anyone hear a turd drop ?
"But what do the resident creationists on the blog think?"
I don't think there are any young earth creationists on this blog. You'll have to go fishing elsewhere.
"Young earth creationists?" Dear Lord. So I might find creationists who are ok with just adjusting the numbers to fit their origin myths?
The non-geneticist Michael Special K. recommends to is sort of a racist through and through.
FACT: The current EPA Administrator had a personal history of denying evolution. Given his unprecedented (for the position) history of denying the greenhouse effect and the basic tenets of epidemiological study, let's just call a spade a spade and and say anti-empiricism in the service of conservative ideology is all of a piece.
Michael Special K. also got into an argument with an economist on this blog whom he challenged by denying economics as an empirically-based field of study.
When a political movement is anti-empirical I don't think it helps to defend some of its practitioners as being slightly less anti-empirical than its most notorious deniers. At the end of the day you're either willing to put facts above feelings or you're not.
And let's not forget: Michael Special K. promotes himself as one of the few physicians in America who would, for the sake of argument and insult - and in the wake of an opioid (and prescription opioid) crisis that kills 50,000 Americans a year - promote opioids, one of the most addictive and yet over-prescribed substances known to man, as choice agents for treating chronic pain.
If a guy in a position of that much liability, responsibility, and (at least as he sees it) willingness to insult everyone else as being beneath his supposedly vaunted professional renown is willing to promote the killing of more Americans just to cast doubt on people he doesn't like on a blog with a single, decontextualized "study" link, then how far is anyone else here willing to go in their anti-empiricism?
Far enough. Far enough.
We started so well resisting the trolling but ultimately couldn’t resist.
Don’t feed the trolls!
Or maybe I don’t fully understand the symbiotic relationship between vocal commenter and troll.
You don't understand anything, Phil. But it's not surprising that a lack of distinctions between different sects of creationism is what sets you off.
Other than that, nice job chiming in 6 to 12 hours since the last three comments to advise on how to handle the thread. Where would everyone be without you, Phil? You're so helpful and useful.
Michael K, thanks for the recommendations. I read the Cochran book when you brought it up months ago and enjoyed the several blog posts just now. I'm downloading the Reich and will read after the epigenetics comic book (more my speed) I'm now on.
Sample size?
"
"But the occupants’ technology changed markedly 67,000 years ago, with smaller, finer implements appearing ..."
What does that argue against?
Men.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा