Humans in California 130,000 Years Ago?

A forum for discussion about the fields of Archaeology and Anthropology - new finds, old finds, theories, etc. We have numerous archaelogists/Anthropologists
and/or students of archaeology/Anthro visiting PaleoPlanet...this is the place for them to intereact, and hopefully provide information to the arm-chair
enthusiasts out there!

Humans in California 130,000 Years Ago?

Nomad1
Registered User
Nomad1
Registered User
Joined: April 7th, 2016, 4:59 am

December 22nd, 2017, 6:14 pm #1

http://nomadsurvival.tk/forum/
Quote
Like
Share

Quillsnkiko
Registered User
Quillsnkiko
Registered User
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 8:25 am

December 30th, 2017, 6:39 am #2

That is very interesting....Thanks for posting the link Nomad1 ...Looking forward to more information about that site at a later date. Quills
" You can't stop the waves .... but, you can learn to surf."
Quote
Like
Share

Nomad1
Registered User
Nomad1
Registered User
Joined: April 7th, 2016, 4:59 am

January 1st, 2018, 1:40 am #3

Makes me wonder if our first nation may be 2nd or 3rd nation instead...
http://nomadsurvival.tk/forum/
Quote
Like
Share

Quillsnkiko
Registered User
Quillsnkiko
Registered User
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 8:25 am

January 1st, 2018, 3:34 am #4

I will bet that most of what we now think to be true of our ancestors will be proved false in the future.....Quills
" You can't stop the waves .... but, you can learn to surf."
Quote
Like
Share

ww
Registered User
ww
Registered User
Joined: June 7th, 2016, 6:46 pm

January 1st, 2018, 7:45 pm #5

Agreed, Quills.   Yet....
To dispute Clovis-first by a few thousand years was controversial. Some archaeologists had won begrudging acceptance with a few scattered excavations.
But to propose a site more than 100,000 years older was professional suicide. It would undermine the research and reputations of most archaeologists now studying the New World.
why is it that so many of those who claim to have the scientific mindset, lose their objectivity  making claims about who was first?
Quote
Like
Share

RonRay
Registered User
RonRay
Registered User
Joined: July 2nd, 2008, 5:01 am

January 2nd, 2018, 2:08 am #6

ww wrote: Agreed, Quills.   Yet....
To dispute Clovis-first by a few thousand years was controversial. Some archaeologists had won begrudging acceptance with a few scattered excavations.
But to propose a site more than 100,000 years older was professional suicide. It would undermine the research and reputations of most archaeologists now studying the New World.
why is it that so many of those who claim to have the scientific mindset, lose their objectivity  making claims about who was first?
Just look at the lies the Leaky family contrived, just to be "first".
Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. ~ Helen Keller
Quote
Like
Share

Quillsnkiko
Registered User
Quillsnkiko
Registered User
Joined: June 22nd, 2006, 8:25 am

January 2nd, 2018, 5:25 am #7

Only time will tell. Books will be rewritten. College courses changed...and it will be found that all the "knowledge" written was wrong....perhaps...perhaps. Only time will tell.....  I hope I am alive to see it....Quills
" You can't stop the waves .... but, you can learn to surf."
Quote
Like
Share