BERING STRAIT . . . OR BERING CROOKED?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Potato head's Oily Obama worries
Next: Physicists find a more efficient way to store quantum information in a crystal, a step towards super-secure quantum communications
From: Cwatters on 24 Jun 2010 11:35 "Intrepid" <Intrepid517(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:0728a731-f502-4150-80ac-5fa8751840a4(a)d16g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > So it came up with the prepostrous theory that early man on the > African or even Eurpean continents trudged north -- spending years, > more likely decades .. No trudging involved. The speed could have been as slow as a few km per lifetime.
From: Morten Reistad on 24 Jun 2010 13:46 In article <0728a731-f502-4150-80ac-5fa8751840a4(a)d16g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, Intrepid <Intrepid517(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >< >NATIVE AMERICANS IN NORTH AMERICA. >< >Consequently, the pseudso had to conveniently manufacture a farfetched >story to make poppycock of this historical fact. >< >So it came up with the prepostrous theory that early man on the >African or even Eurpean continents trudged north -- spending years, >more likely decades -- in an incredibly hostile environment, then hit >the jackpot when it finally headed south. No, not decades. THOUSANDS of years. Every single family moved at most a few kilometers. As gather-huntereres or early slasher-farmers they needed to move anyway. So, as the populace grew, more land was occupied. Europe up to around 45N, and Asia south of the Himalayas, and East Asia as far as Hokkaido is not exactly hostile land for humans, once the ice has retreated far enough; i.e. with a climate resembling the present. The island path along the Kuriles is also a natural one for fishermen. Humans were pretty able fishermen by 12000BC. The estimate is that it took humanity a millennium to get from Hokkaido to the Aleutes, and another to get from there to where the climate gets noticably warmer. Again, each family didn't cross much water. The average New Yorker commutes a larger distance. >But it just doesn't wash. >< >Common sense dictates that no tribal leaders -- in their right mind -- >would have searched for "greener pastures" by heading so far north? >< >True, they may not have realized they were heading north (assuming >there were no maps or compasses), but they'd soon realize it was >getting much colder and more hostile every mile they traveled. And? Colder, but fully survivable land to the one side, with no competing humans and lots of food, and somewhat warmer land to the other, with several competing humans and less food. And even if people consitently choose Warm in 9 out of 10 cases, the remaining tenth can fully explain the migration. Again, each one didn't travel a large distance. And, once you start travelling from Kamchatka out in the ocean the climate is not much different. It is the same coastal climate until somewhere in Britsh Columbia, where it starts to get a little warmer. >Why would they continue? Why would they have started off in the first >place? >< >How would they know that -- if they ever completed their trip -- >they'd be much better off than they were before? Nobody could've told >them. >< >What would they have done for food? Once their supply was exhausted in >that barren landscape, what did they eat? What barren landscape? Crossing the sonoma desert going south is a much bigger hurdle. The entire coastal area from Hokkaido to Vancouver is a natural boreal rain forest, as long as you follow the Kuriles, the outer Kamchatka, the Aleutes and the Alaskan panhandle down to warmer areas. Lots and lots of fish too. For some deafaring humans that have understood that whale blubber is good for you, it would have been a garden of eden. >How about the trip itself? >< >How did they protect themselves from the elements -- the sub-freeezing >temperatures and the Arctic wind? How did they protect their torches >from blowing out since they needed fire, yet there were neither >matches >nor lighters. >< >This litany of absurdities could go on and on. Go ask an eskimo. Or a Lapp. Perhaps they can get the Quallunat bits corrected. (Yep, look up that word. You may learn something). And the Inuit, Lapps and Komi live a full 20 degrees further north than it would take to do this migration. >The absurdity also applies even alowing for the psuedos to insist >their incredible trek took place before the north was a frozen >wasteland. >< >The plain and simple fact is that such a venture never happened but, >instead, a fairy tale to try to remove a thorny issue from the theory >of man's evolution. >< >Early man NEVER crossed the Bering Strait to migrate to what would >become North America. It simply did not -- could not -- have happened >that way. You got the path wrong. All evidence points to the Aleutes as the path. There is abundant fishing and a boreal rain forest all the way, except for two somewhat longer hops you can see to the next island. >Let the pseudoscientists who cling to this ridiculous idea give it a >try to prove their point. Let them make the trip without themal >clothing, tents, battery-powered heaters, >a stockpile of food, directional finders, etc., etc., etc. The Inuit usually have to resque the Quallunat that come north with tools like this. I would take anoraks, seal meat and sledge dogs over battery powered heating equipment any day. Or are you saying that eskimos have powers from some spaceship? >Maybe then -- and ONLY then -- would they realize how prepostrous the >Pseudscientific Establishment theory is. >< >All it takes is a bit of common sense to realize that the earliest man >to inhabit North America certainly didn't make the trip by crossing >the Bering Strait, even IF the strait was a land mass at the time. >< >It's just one of many flights of fantasy by dreamers and hallucinators >-- the pseudos -- who just can't seem to grasp the undeniable fact >that, while they CAN fool some of the people all of the time and all >of the people some of the time, they CAN'T con Ed CONrad. First a strawman argument; and then keep the eyes wide shut for the physical realities. Some science. You really need to take your battery powered heaters up north; but tell the Inuit where you are going. -- mrr
From: tadchem on 24 Jun 2010 17:08 In 20000 BCE the ice caps were at their largest, leaving the oceans at their lowest - about 120 m lower than they are today http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png Much of the continental shelves were exposed. Beachcombers could have casually walked from Asia all the way to Tierra del Fuego along the now-submerged continental slopes. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA
From: Chris.B on 25 Jun 2010 01:14 Presumably prey animals and birds had yet to discover a fear of humans. And humans yet to discover a fear of coal. <cough>
From: RichTravsky on 6 Jul 2010 00:30
Intrepid wrote: > My late father, who only went to the fifth grade, used to say, "The > problem with telling ONE lie is that you may have to tell a HUNDRED > more lies to cover it up." > < > This certainly applies to the asinine theory of early man arriving in > North America via the Bering Strait. > < > You see, the Pseudoscientific Establishment learned many long years > ago that its theory of the evolution of man in Africa had a horsefly > in its ointment. > < > NATIVE AMERICANS IN NORTH AMERICA. > < > Consequently, the pseudso had to conveniently manufacture a farfetched > story to make poppycock of this historical fact. > < > So it came up with the prepostrous theory that early man on the > African or even Eurpean continents trudged north -- spending years, > more likely decades -- in an incredibly hostile environment, then hit > the jackpot when it finally headed south. > < > But it just doesn't wash. > < > Common sense dictates that no tribal leaders -- in their right mind -- > would have searched for "greener pastures" by heading so far north? > < > True, they may not have realized they were heading north (assuming > there were no maps or compasses), but they'd soon realize it was > getting much colder and more hostile every mile they traveled. > < > Why would they continue? Why would they have started off in the first > place? > < > How would they know that -- if they ever completed their trip -- > they'd be much better off than they were before? Nobody could've told > them. > < > What would they have done for food? Once their supply was exhausted in > that barren landscape, what did they eat? > < > How about the trip itself? > < > How did they protect themselves from the elements -- the sub-freeezing > temperatures and the Arctic wind? How did they protect their torches > from blowing out since they needed fire, yet there were neither > matches nor lighters. How convenient to ignore the archaeological, genetic, and linguistic evidence. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-06/uoaf-nbc062910.php Fairbanks, Alaska�A team of researchers, including several at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, have found what looks to be the first well-supported demonstration of an ancient language connection between people in remote Asia and North America. Their work is chronicled in "The Dene-Yeniseian Connection," a publication of the Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska. In the book, lead author Edward Vajda of Western Washington University details his hypothesis that the Ket language of Central Siberia is related to the North American Na-Dene language family, which includes Tlingit, Gwich'in, Dena'ina, Koyukon, Navajo, Carrier, Hupa, Apache and about 45 other languages. ... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100628170926.htm ... Genetic studies have shed light on the initial lineages that entered North America, distinguishing the earliest Native American groups from those that arrived later. However, a clear picture of the number of initial migratory events and routes has been elusive due to incomplete analysis. ... To resolve these inconsistent lines of evidence, the group sequenced and analyzed 63 C1d mtDNA genomes from throughout the Americas. This high-resolution study not only confirmed that C1d was one of the founding lineages in North America 15,000 to 18,000 years ago, but revealed another critical insight. "These first female American founders carried not one but two different C1d genomes," said Ugo Perego of the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation and primary author of the study, "thus further increasing the number of recognized maternal lineages from Beringia." These findings raise the number of founding maternal lineages in North America to fifteen. ... ... Alessandro Achilli of the University of Perugia, a coauthor of the report, suggests that the number of distinct mitochondrial genomes that passed from Asian into North America is probably much higher. "These yet undiscovered maternal lineages will be identified within the next three to four years," Achilli noted, "when the methodological approach that we used in our study will be systematically applied." ... http://archaeology.about.com/od/yterms/qt/yana_rhs.htm The Yana Rhinoceros Horn Site (Yana RHS) is located on the Yana river in the Arctic Circle of northeastern Siberia (70 degrees north). It is the oldest known human occupation within the Arctic Circle to date; the next oldest widely accepted site discovered so far is Berelekh, at 13,000-14,000 years ago. Yana RHS was discovered eroding from a high Pleistocene terrace with a Holocene overwash. The cultural materials were recovered both as deposits in the cut bank walls and as beach deposits in the modern floodplain. Eroding from the cutbank (and examined with a trench) was a cultural layer of artifacts and animal bones (mammoth, bison, and horse), radiocarbon dated to 27,300 +/- 270 RCYBP. ... |