Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Earliest American find detailed

RANDOLPH E. SCHMID

The Associated Press

Latest comment posted at 9:31 PM EDT 11/05/08

Remains of meals indicate seaweed was eaten in southern Chile more than 14,000 years ago ...Read the full article

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

  1. Tristram Shandy from london ontario, Canada writes: "The materials in Oregon and Chile were radiocarbon dated at 12,500 years ago, which, Mr. Dillehay said, translates to between 14,200 and 14,500 calendar years ago"

    I don't understand this, can someone elucidate?
  2. Claia Bryja from San Francisco, United States writes: The results of radiocarbon dating are affected by variations in the rate at which carbon-14 is created by cosmic rays impacting on Earth's atmosphere from space. If all the carbon-14 on Earth was created at a steady rate, then the amount of carbon-14 in a sample would reveal the sample's exact age. However, variations in the Sun's magnetic activity cycle mean that samples from certain times in history start out front-loaded with more carbon-14, while samples from other times in history start out with less. Tree ring dating is the best way to correct for this. If you have tree rings, you can date the age of a tree exactly to the year. Applying the carbon-14 dating technique to the same tree reveals the difference that must be added or subtracted from the carbon-14 date to get the correct date. Trees all around the world reveal the same corrections at the same historical times. (To extend tree rings back more than 10,000 years, multiple ancient tree rings are overlapped until continuity is found with todays trees.)
  3. Ryan Ginger from Ottawa, Canada writes: Archaeology is an exciting field today, in part because of new technologies, but also because of intellectual transformation from within the field. As a consequence, (most) everything is up in the air nowadays.

    One of the dominant theories now is that people followed the Asiatic coasts--using boats--along the pacific rim, essentially "pinned" to the Pacific by the Rockies and the Ice sheets. Unable to travel far inland, they naturally drove south, quickly.
  4. Dick Garneau from Canada writes: It's nice to see that a general consensus has pushed back the occupation of Monte Verde to 12,000 B.C. from previous dates of 6,000 to 8,000 B.C and now accepts a coastal migration rather than the ice free router. Others suggest Monte Verde was occupied more like 30,000 B.C. but no consensus on those studies. Although a growing number accept that America was occupied likely 30,000 BC to 50,000 B.C.
    History is an exciting field today.
  5. Steve Church from Canada writes: If you can watch for it, check out the docudrama called "Made in Kanata". There's a documentary about DNA studies. Using DNA as a proxy suggests 3 waves of exploration and settlement. There is also the suggestion of European arrival and introduction of the solutrean-style spear point. That evolution became the hallmakr spearpoint of Clovis culture. Easily the most exciting revelation is the Monte Verde site - it simply defies sensible explanation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis
  6. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: Dick Garneau writes: "Although a growing number accept that America was occupied likely 30,000 to 50,000 B.C. "

    I've also come across these figures, but I wonder what the evidence is. This would mean that homo sapiens was here in the Americas long before his arrival in Europe, dated 30,000 years ago. Could there possibly have been a reverse migration from the Americas to Asia and Europe? Did homo sapiens originate in the Americas (gasp)?

    As far-fetched as it may sound, this is apparently what the anthropologist Louis Leakey of "Lucy" fame believed at the end of his life, as I recall reading somewhere. In any event, all theories are worth investigating, as what could be more fascinating than tracing our origins.
  7. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: The theory of a cross-Atlantic voyage of early humans from Europe to America is supported by recent DNA studies showing a genetic link between the people of southern France and the Ojibway. This is mentioned in the DVD, "America's Stone Age Explorers", produced by Nova.

    Also, the distinct high-ended canoes of the exterminated Beothuk of Newfoundland, a very ancient people referred to by the neighbouring Mik'maq as the "Old Ones", can also be seen in the famous cave-paintings in southern France and northern Spain. There are also clear depictions in the caves of Lascaux of the same sort of animal roundups and corraling practised in Native America, particularly on the Plains.
  8. r b from Calgary, Canada writes: Anthropologists are just now recovering from their early tendencies to underestimate ancient humans, regardless of race.

    The most hilarious example of "pop-anthropology" that I recall was the famous "Chariots of the Gods" charades by Erich von Daniken in the 70's.

    At one point, he wondered hpow the "primitives" of Easter Island could have ever erected their stone monoliths that brood over their coast. It must have been "aliens".

    After all the hype had died down, someone apparently finally thought to ask the modern day inhabitants of Easter Island, at which time they easilly demonstrated the ancient methods of carving, transporting and erecting of the multi-ton stone structures.

    Many more such examples. It became fashionable to depict ancient Europeans as savages, right up until Roman times, until discoveries such as the Ice Man showed that even thousands of years before the rise of the Pyramids, prehistoric Europeans were farmers, metalsmiths,skilled craftsmen,village dwellers and travelling merchants.

    Ancient humans were as intelligent, as curious, as restless and no doubt just as petty as we, or at least you, all are.
  9. martha stewart from Canada writes: Once upon a time, less than 20 years ago, the consensus all agreed that the only migration to North America was via Berengia (Bering land bridge). This established 'truth' was called 'Clovis First.'

    The debate was over. Anyone who dared challenge this orthodoxy was shunned and ridiculed, their research funding reduced and their careers stunted. Their papers were not published and they were not invited to conferences.

    It got so bad that archaeologists would simply stop digging when they reached the Clovis First layer, lest they find something heretical.

    But some ignored the groupthink and stayed true to their purpose - discovery. That included Dillehay, the man who found Monte Verde. Despite the evidence he found, he was ridiculed and ignored by the 'consensus' herd.

    Finally the evidence could not be ignored. And now we know why.

    Does this tyranny of the consensus orthodoxy - the debate is over!!! - sound familiar? (hint - climate change)

    Read 'Bones' by Elaine Dewar.
  10. Steve Church from Canada writes: Gail n Dick:- The 30,000 ya number probably comes from a South American cavesite, Pedra Furada, and it remains controversial (the stone 'tools' and charcoal may be natural) http://www.athenapub.com/10pfurad.htm Richard Leakey and others worked through the Calico, California site for very very ancient clues (135,000 ya) without solid success. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calico_Early_Man_Site The Cactus Hill site where the controversial solutrean spear point was found dated to 16,000 ya.
  11. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: Steve: Thank you for the website. I've now made a note: Charcoal samples taken from hearths at Pedra Furada in northeastern Brazil have been carbon-dated to before 55,000 years ago. According to the archaeologists involved in the findings, the samples proved to be even beyond the limit of the new dating procedure.

    Regarding the early cave paintings, such as those at Pedra Furada, I find it interesting how archaeologists always describe the stick-like human/animal figures as "anthropomorphic". I think they are quite realistic in that they probably depict holy men or shamans (or is that shamen), dressed up in animal skins and wearing masks with large horns or antlers, performing rituals prior to the hunt. These dances are still held in Native communities today. In fact, I have a small corn-husk doll called "Buffalo Dancer", similarly dressed, whose antecedents no doubt date back to those ancient cave figures.
  12. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: For clues to the first humans in the Americas, we should also look at Native stories and legends. The legends of the Ojibway or Anishnawbe, eloquently retold by Basil Johnston, speak of hunting the giant beaver and bear - the megafauna - that became extinct 15,000 years ago. The Indigenous people have been here a very long time, the dates for human habitation constantly being pushed back farther and farther.
  13. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes:"... legends... speak of hunting the giant beaver and bear - the megafauna - that became extinct 15,000 years ago."

    The indians basically killed them all off as soon as they arrived here, or killed off their prey in the case of some of the predators.
  14. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes:"The Indigenous people have been here a very long time..."

    Their ancestors, maybe, but the majority of indians today extant are younger than you or I.
  15. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: There is no evidence the Indigenous Americans killed off the large mammals shortly after arriving here. Extinction of the megafauna occurred around the world at roughly the same time - 10 to 15,000 years ago - and thus was due to environmental and ecological factors such as the retreat of the glaciers and the onset of warmer climates. Both in Eurasia and North America, glacial species such as mammoths were replaced by forest animals such as elk, deer and caribou.

    If the Native Americans killed off the giant beaver and bear, then early humans worldwide did likewise, so the fault is universal. This theory, however, is not supported by any current commentators on the subject.
  16. Kevin Desmoulin from Toronto, Canada writes: I think the larger animals die out to changes in habitat not so much due to humans, ever go hauling beavers out the woods? just imagine a giant one, although the pelt would make a great bed spread.

    ya, Bering strait is just one of the theories now.
  17. martha stewart from Canada writes: Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: "There is no evidence the Indigenous Americans killed off the large mammals shortly after arriving here."

    Complete nonsense. You need to do some research. Your post on this is full of unsubstantiated misinformation.

    One must wonder - where do you get your "information"?

    P.S. This impact - the arrival of humans - also happened in Australia when humans arrived there much ealier than North America.

    And more recently it happened in New Zealand.

  18. Will Kuhlkamp from Peterborough, Canada writes: The appearance of man on this continent has still a lot lot of pieces missing in its puzzle. The dying out of the mega fauna co-inciding with the appearence of man could also have been caused by the spread of introduced diseases lsimular to brucellosis or hoof and mouth besides overhunting. However I probably agree with clima change as the culprit since it happend in Eurasia as well and at the same time.
  19. martha stewart from Canada writes: The climate changed many times without the mass extinction that coincided with the arrival of humans. If climate change was the cause, why didn't it happen before?

    There was no similar mega-fauna extinction in Eurasia except in the north where modern humans most recently arrived, and the timing was not the same.

    What happened in Australia provides a simpler case study for an extinction wave coinciding with human arrival.
  20. Gail C from Canada writes: There are 99,100 sites for "climate change extinction megafauna", so google away, for those of you so interested. Let me quote a sentence from one website: "Overkill is bad science because it is immune to the empirical record." In other words, there's no evidence that early humans killed off the great beasts.

    Update. Some 140,000 species a year are being driven to extinction, largely by human activities. Particularly at the precipice are the remnants of the megafauna, elephants, lions, tigers, rhinos. Now, that's overkill.
  21. W R from Stratford, PE, Canada writes: This has nothing to do with this story but could the editors at the G&M explain to their readers their criteria for closing comments on a story. One story has over 700 comments while others are shut down after only 50 or 60 comments are received. What is the difference?
  22. Gail C from Canada writes: What happened in Australia, an island, cannot be conmpared to what happened in two enormous continents, North and South America, as far as extinction of the megafauna was concerned. The two continents were teeming with wildlife, while the human population was ver few in number.

    In the Americas, if one believes in a human-induced extinction, then one has to credit the early hunters with amazing physical prowess and technical skills. Homo Sapiens vs. the Sabre-Toothed Tiger. It would make a good comic book series.
  23. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: "There is no evidence the Indigenous Americans killed off the large mammals shortly after arriving here. Extinction of the megafauna occurred around the world at roughly the same time - 10 to 15,000 years ago - and thus was due to environmental and ecological factors such as the retreat of the glaciers and the onset of warmer climates..."

    Mammoths, wooly rhinos, irish elk, cave bears, ground sloths, moas, and others survived through several glaciations and retreats. And everywhere outside Africa the megafauna populations collapsed as soon as humans moved in.
  24. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes:"If the Native Americans killed off the giant beaver and bear, then early humans worldwide did likewise, so the fault is universal."

    Universal to what? Humans?

    Of course humans are basically the same everywhere. We exploit the resources available to us to the limit of our capacity, and the amerindians were, and are, no different.

    And killing off the giant grazers deprived sabretooth cats of the prey to which they had adapted, even if humans didn't hunt the kitties down themselves.
  25. Gail C from Canada writes: The Amerindians lived in a way that was much more respectful of the environment than the colonists who supplanted them. A study of traditional Indigenous societies from the shores of the Arctic to Tierra del Fuego (did I get that right?) will reveal the same thing. They consider themselves to be the custodians of the Earth. We have much to learn from them.
  26. Gail C from Toromto, Canada writes: I now await, with baited breath, the hoary old buffalo jump argument.
  27. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Gail C from Canada writes: "The Amerindians lived in a way that was much more respectful of the environment..."

    Ah, the 'noble savage' myth.

    They slaughtered to the best of their ability, and only their failure to rise above the neolithic level of tool use before the arrival of more advanced groups prevented them from doing any more than they did.

    I'm sure they'd have managed eventually to develop better technologies, but they were at least 1000 years or more behind the europeans.

    And their descendants are certainly no better, stringing gill nets across entire rivers so that no spawning fish might escape, for example, or even just the act of fishing while the spawning is going on.
  28. martha stewart from Canada writes: Gail C writes "What happened in Australia, an island, cannot be conmpared to what happened in two enormous continents, North and South America... "

    A truly ridiculous argument. Know how big Australia is? The rest of your comparison - "teeming wildlife" vs low human numbers - makes zero sense. Goofy to generalize like that.

    "if one believes in a human-induced extinction, then one has to credit the early hunters with amazing physical prowess and technical skills. Homo Sapiens vs. the Sabre-Toothed Tiger."

    They had the ability to kill anything. Like mammoths. More recently they killed whales and polar bears, etc. A sabre-tooth tiger versus a group of intelligent hunters with fire if they needed it is easy. The Masai routinely killed lions with spears.

    Your "140,000 species a year are being driven to extinction" is a myth based on bogus extrapolations. For example, how many have disappeared in Canada in the last 100 years?

    Blaming climate change is very popular these days.
  29. Gail C from Toromto, Canada writes: Well, I see this has descended to the level of race-bashing. This fish won't bite. Logging off...
  30. martha stewart from Canada writes: Gail C - Race has absolutely nothing to do with it. We are dealing with the species Homo sapiens.

    The only racism involved is when people suggest that some people were fundamentally different and lived 'in harmony with nature." That denies how sophisticated Native North Americans or any early hunter-gatherers really were. That fits the myth of the "primitive savages." You know, the myth that justified the conquest of North America.

    Try reading the book 1491 for starters. Nice summary.

    P.S. You really need to critically examine some of your "facts."
  31. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Gail, when you start to amke these ridiculous claims about indians being so much better than everyone else as 'stewards of the land' or other such nonsense, you have to expect people to put you straight.
  32. martha stewart from Canada writes: You got it GlynnMhor.

    Except some cultures were not 1000 years behind the Europeans.

    And firearms, the usual difference people point out, were in the hands of some North American cultures shortly after they were invented. (via the fur trade).

    The bows and arrows used in North America were as powerful as the ones the Turks had... only the English long bows could shoot further but that was more useful for war than hunting.
  33. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: As to the fishing, the pickerel will start to spawn soon in Lake of the Prairies behind Assessippi dam in western Manitoba, and the indians from all over southwestern Manitoba will soon be showing up, as they do every year, to assert their 'right' to overfish the spawners as they try to move into the streams.

    Many of them are commercial fishermen in their own right, and rather than use the fish under the 'food and ceremonial' use permitted in the various treaties and Acts, they just sell the pickerel to their usual customers, or off the back of their pickup trucks.
  34. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: martha stewart from Canada writes: "Except some cultures were not 1000 years behind the Europeans."

    True enough, for at least some technologies.

    It was a sweeping generalization that is probably pretty close on average even if it fails here and there in some details.

    In metallurgy, for example, the amerindians were more than 1000 years behind.
  35. Gail C from Toromto, Canada writes: "We are the people of the earth. The Creator of all that is set us down here... to walk in a sacred way and to be the keepers and the custodians of this land." This is from a book I have, "Songs for the People: Teachings on the Natural Way", by Arthur Solomon, Anishnawbe Spiritual Teacher, who lived here in Ontario.

    To M and T: I do urge you to read what Native people themselves have to say. There are all sorts of Native websites such as www.firstpeople.us that are filled with the beauty, wisdom and poetry of the Indigenous people down the ages. The theme of their being the custodians of the land is repeated over and over, if you care to open your ears and listen.

    "Walk softly on the Earth as a relative to all that live" "Take from the Earth what is needed and nothing more." With these thoughts, culled from Native wisdom, I bid you good night.
  36. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: Oh, but this is so beautiful, I can't help posting it:

    My Moccasins

    My moccasins have not walked
    Among the giant forest trees
    My leggings have not brushed
    Against the fern and berry bush
    My medicine pouch has not been filled
    With roots and herbs and sweet grass
    My hands have not fondled
    The spotted fawn
    My eyes have not beheld
    The golden rainbow of the north
    My hair has not been adorned
    With the eagle feather
    Yet,
    My dreams are dreams of these
    My heart is one with them
    The scent of them caresses my soul.

    Duke Redbird, from "The Only Good Indian"
  37. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: And this from an Algonquin Prayer:

    Give us hearts to understand
    Never to take from creation's beauty more than we give;
    Never to destroy wantonly for the furtherance of greed;
    Never to deny to give our hands for the building of earth's beauty; Never to take from her what we cannot use.

    Give us hearts to understand
    That to destroy earth's music is to create confusion;
    That to wreck her appearance is to blind us to beauty;
    That to callously pollute her fragrance is to make a house of stench;
    That as we care for her, she will care for us.

    O Great Spirit, whose voice I hear in the winds,
    Whose breath gives life to all the world, hear me.
    I need your strength and wisdom. May I walk in beauty.
  38. martha stewart from Canada writes: GlynnMhor of Skywall writes: "In metallurgy, for example, the amerindians were more than 1000 years behind."

    On the other hand, stone weapons did the job. Obsidian arrow heads work/cut far better than steel ones and flints worked as well. They immediately adopted metal arrowheads when available because they were cheaper (in time cost or trade cost) and much more durable.
  39. martha stewart from Canada writes: Gail C - That's nice poetry. But what people have to say today is what they have to say today, in English.

    I think you are missing a key point with your 'racist' defense. The pre-European North Americans were far more sophisticated and capable than myth suggests. That is why, like Homo sapiens everywhere, they had impacts on their ecosystems.

    Your quotes capture the ideal. But one could also quote countless Europeans who write similar sentiments. Try John Muir. That still doesn't change the big picture.
  40. Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes: Martha: Shall we agree to disagree, as always? In any event, my race-bashing comment was not directed at you, but a master of the trade...

    May you walk in beauty. (A traditional Native salutation). Goodnight. (This time, I really do mean it.)
  41. martha stewart from Canada writes: Gail C - But of course. Good night. You know important dreams were to many cultures...
  42. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: Gail C from Toronto, Canada writes:"... my race-bashing comment..."

    That's one of your specialities, Gail, with empty claims that non-amerindian races aren't as careful with resources as the amerindian ones are.

Join the Conversation, Leave a Comment

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

You must be logged-in to submit a comment — login now!

Not registered with globeandmail.com? Register now. It is quick and free.

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top