| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Anthropology - Paleo Forum » Seaweed? 50mile trek inland, beachcombing...
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
|
| Author |
Message |
| Lee Olsen... |
 Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 2, 10:10 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote: On Jun 1, 8:41 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
nickname wrote:
On May 11, 1:59 pm, "Makouli" <m... at (no spam) work.com> wrote:
"nickname" <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:23e91c3f-4450-4b73-8422-bdca06f443a7 at (no spam) w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com....
See map, the site was adjacent to the oceanic bay on a creek & peat
watershed.Perfect for combined waterside ambushes and seaside
foraging, seaweed and mollusc foraging, lots of walking too..
http://the-arc-ddeden.blogspot.com/
What is it with you wet apes and your top posting?
See map above, the site was less than ten miles from salt water, other
Call it an even ten miles.
THat makes it a 20 mile round trip to go "beachcombing".
Sites nearer to the bay were obviously washed out / submerged /
flooded.
Says who, your imagination? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lee Olsen... |
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:18 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 2, 10:24 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 12, 5:35 am, "Rick Wagler" <taxid... at (no spam) shaw.ca> wrote:
"Marc Verhaegen" <m_verhae... at (no spam) skynet.be> wrote in message
news:C44DF312.11FD7%m_verhaegen at (no spam) skynet.be...> SF:
Gee, Pops the problem is there is no valid reason to
charcterize hominds as "littoral mammal".
My boy,
- SC fat : not in savanna mammals
SF:
Feed 'em and see what happens. Not that much fat
in pre-industrial humans either
SFs are stupid stupid stupid: never heard of Paleolithic venuses??
Inform, my little boy, and then come back (or stay away).
Name a mammal that is physioilogically incapable
of accumulating fat sub-cutaneously.
Most long distance runners are extremely skinny but afaik still have
kidney fat.
So are most San, what's your point?
Quote: Most long distance swimmers have abundant subcutaneous fat
in addition to kidney fat.We're not talking about couch potatoes or
caged gorillas. Human newborns have lots more fat than gazelles or
chimps.
So, there are no H/G long distance swimmers, looks like you lose
again. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| nickname... |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:28 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 3, 7:15 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On Jun 2, 10:10 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 1, 8:41 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
nickname wrote:
On May 11, 1:59 pm, "Makouli" <m... at (no spam) work.com> wrote:
"nickname" <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:23e91c3f-4450-4b73-8422-bdca06f443a7 at (no spam) w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
See map, the site was adjacent to the oceanic bay on a creek & peat
watershed.Perfect for combined waterside ambushes and seaside
foraging, seaweed and mollusc foraging, lots of walking too..
http://the-arc-ddeden.blogspot.com/
What is it with you wet apes and your top posting?
See map above, the site was less than ten miles from salt water, other
Call it an even ten miles.
THat makes it a 20 mile round trip to go "beachcombing".
Sites nearer to the bay were obviously washed out / submerged /
flooded.
Says who, your imagination?
common sense. river enters bay connected to ocean, tides, seasonal
flooding, etc.
Do you think 10 miles walking/swimming/canoing was some enormous
undertaking for people that had traveled from Siberia? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| nickname... |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 3, 7:18 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On Jun 2, 10:24 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 12, 5:35 am, "Rick Wagler" <taxid... at (no spam) shaw.ca> wrote:
"Marc Verhaegen" <m_verhae... at (no spam) skynet.be> wrote in message
news:C44DF312.11FD7%m_verhaegen at (no spam) skynet.be...> SF:
Gee, Pops the problem is there is no valid reason to
charcterize hominds as "littoral mammal".
My boy,
- SC fat : not in savanna mammals
SF:
Feed 'em and see what happens. Not that much fat
in pre-industrial humans either
SFs are stupid stupid stupid: never heard of Paleolithic venuses??
Inform, my little boy, and then come back (or stay away).
Name a mammal that is physioilogically incapable
of accumulating fat sub-cutaneously.
Most long distance runners are extremely skinny but afaik still have
kidney fat.
So are most San, what's your point?
San newborns are a lot chubbier than chimp or kudu babies.
Quote: Most long distance swimmers have abundant subcutaneous fat
in addition to kidney fat.We're not talking about couch potatoes or
caged gorillas. Human newborns have lots more fat than gazelles or
chimps.
So, there are no H/G long distance swimmers, looks like you lose
again.
No human long distance swimmers? Got your head in the sand again I
see, probably looking for water. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Rich Travsky... |
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 10:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
nickname wrote:
Quote: On Jun 1, 8:41 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
nickname wrote:
On May 11, 1:59 pm, "Makouli" <m... at (no spam) work.com> wrote:
"nickname" <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:23e91c3f-4450-4b73-8422-bdca06f443a7 at (no spam) w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
See map, the site was adjacent to the oceanic bay on a creek & peat
watershed.Perfect for combined waterside ambushes and seaside
foraging, seaweed and mollusc foraging, lots of walking too..
http://the-arc-ddeden.blogspot.com/
What is it with you wet apes and your top posting?
See map above, the site was less than ten miles from salt water, other
Call it an even ten miles.
THat makes it a 20 mile round trip to go "beachcombing".
Sites nearer to the bay were obviously washed out / submerged /
flooded.
Which doesn't change anything. THat's still a 20 mile round trip for that site. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lee Olsen... |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jul 6, 10:28 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote: On Jun 3, 7:15 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 2, 10:10 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 1, 8:41 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
nickname wrote:
On May 11, 1:59 pm, "Makouli" <m... at (no spam) work.com> wrote:
"nickname" <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:23e91c3f-4450-4b73-8422-bdca06f443a7 at (no spam) w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
See map, the site was adjacent to the oceanic bay on a creek & peat
watershed.Perfect for combined waterside ambushes and seaside
foraging, seaweed and mollusc foraging, lots of walking too..
http://the-arc-ddeden.blogspot.com/
What is it with you wet apes and your top posting?
See map above, the site was less than ten miles from salt water, other
Call it an even ten miles.
THat makes it a 20 mile round trip to go "beachcombing".
Sites nearer to the bay were obviously washed out / submerged /
flooded.
Says who, your imagination?
common sense. river enters bay connected to ocean, tides, seasonal
flooding, etc.
Do you think 10 miles walking/swimming/canoing was some enormous
undertaking for people that had traveled from Siberia?
The Anangula site wasn't washed out, why the special pleading? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lee Olsen... |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jul 15, 10:01 am, "Paul Crowley"
<slkwuoiutiuytciu... at (no spam) slkjlskjoioue.com> wrote:
Quote: "Rich Travsky" <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:487CB880.E46FA7AE at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com...
in addition to kidney fat.We're not talking about couch potatoes or
caged gorillas. Human newborns have lots more fat than gazelles or
chimps.
The human mother does not lactate immediately. The fat helps the baby to survive.
Hopelessly irrelevant. The foetus
does little else in the last 3 months
of pregnancy but build up fat. Its
reserves are far in excess of day or
two's nutrition. Then new-born
infants put on more fat -- for the
whole of their first year of life.
NONE of this is for 'reserves' -- any
more than is the mother's fat, built
up before and during pregancy.
Humans are, in this respect, closer
to seals than to other primates, or
to most mammals.
Says who, the brainless wonder who thinks chimps can't
dig and gets his anthro info from down at the pub?
http://tinyurl.com/3cnmum
Paul Crowley: "Chimps do NOT have the capacity to dig."
http://tinyurl.com/2wldcx
Paul Crowley: "You will get better thinking about human evolution
on any day in any pub than you will get in 10 years of
any PA 'scientific' journal." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Rich Travsky... |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
nickname wrote:
Quote:
On May 12, 5:35 am, "Rick Wagler" <taxid... at (no spam) shaw.ca> wrote:
"Marc Verhaegen" <m_verhae... at (no spam) skynet.be> wrote in message
Gee, Pops the problem is there is no valid reason to
charcterize hominds as "littoral mammal".
My boy,
- SC fat : not in savanna mammals
SF:
Feed 'em and see what happens. Not that much fat
in pre-industrial humans either
SFs are stupid stupid stupid: never heard of Paleolithic venuses??
Inform, my little boy, and then come back (or stay away).
Name a mammal that is physioilogically incapable
of accumulating fat sub-cutaneously.
Most long distance runners are extremely skinny but afaik still have
kidney fat. Most long distance swimmers have abundant subcutaneous fat
Obviously, you have not looked at any swim meets...
Quote: in addition to kidney fat.We're not talking about couch potatoes or
caged gorillas. Human newborns have lots more fat than gazelles or
chimps.
The human mother does not lactate immediately. The fat helps the baby to survive.
Quote: Fat is a balance
between opportunity - sufficient food - and cost -
reduced ability to avoid predators. All the Venus
statuettes prove is that some cultures in the distant
past attached some significance to fat accumulation
in females. Your response is a classic non sequitur.
Rick Wagler |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lee Olsen... |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 11:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jul 15, 12:59 pm, Marc Verhaegen <m_verhae... at (no spam) skynet.be> wrote:
Quote:
There are no fat animals on the savanna (except ....
Homo. Who do you think made the millions of flakes found at
archaeological sites all over the savanna, skinny lions? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Paul Crowley... |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:01 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:487CB880.E46FA7AE at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com...
Quote: in addition to kidney fat.We're not talking about couch potatoes or
caged gorillas. Human newborns have lots more fat than gazelles or
chimps.
The human mother does not lactate immediately. The fat helps the baby to survive.
Hopelessly irrelevant. The foetus
does little else in the last 3 months
of pregnancy but build up fat. Its
reserves are far in excess of day or
two's nutrition. Then new-born
infants put on more fat -- for the
whole of their first year of life.
NONE of this is for 'reserves' -- any
more than is the mother's fat, built
up before and during pregancy.
Humans are, in this respect, closer
to seals than to other primates, or
to most mammals.
These are obvious facts, and need
an explanation. AAH theories provide
one -- namely that we were once some-
thing like seals. That is, of course,
next to insane. But it is something --
and far more persuasive than the
obdurate stance of deliberate
ignorance adopted by standard PA
dolts.
Paul. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marc Verhaegen... |
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:59 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Savanna Fantast:
Quote: Gee, Pops the problem is there is no valid reason to
charcterize hominds as "littoral mammal".
My boy,
- SC fat : not in savanna mammals
SF:
Quote: Feed 'em and see what happens. Not that much fat
in pre-industrial humans either
SFs are stupid stupid stupid: never heard of Paleolithic venuses??
Inform, my little boy, and then come back (or stay away).
SF:
Quote: Name a mammal that is physioilogically incapable
of accumulating fat sub-cutaneously.
My boy, don't you even know that chimps have 10 times less SC fat than
humans??
Quote: Most long distance runners are extremely skinny but afaik still have
kidney fat. Most long distance swimmers have abundant subcutaneous fat
Obviously, you have not looked at any swim meets...
There are no fat animals on the savanna (except some small burrowing rodents
or marsupials, but their fat is brown rather than white, internal or
localised (eg, fat tail) rather than SC, and, unlike human fat, it is
subject to seasonal fluctuation. Among larger animals, the dromedary has
occasional need of a fat store against food shortage, but here again the fat
is highly concentrated (in the hump), varies with the animal¹s feeding
condition, and fluctuates between 0.5 & 8 % of its body weight. The only
+-fat animal which exploits the grasslands around the rivers is the hippo,
but it does this at night & stays in the water during the day.
The marine mammals have extensive fat tissues : from 20 to 25 % of the body
weight in fast swimmers (eg, finwhales) to more than 40 % in slow spp (eg,
right whales). The adaptiveness of this feature in water has been further
illustrated by studies of human athletes, eg, African people (with somewhat
less SC fat than in other people) tend to be the swiftest runners over both
short & long distances, but they are generally poor swimmers. Successful
swimmers are on average fatter than the winners of track events ; many
long-distance swimmers are even grossly fat (Pugh & Edholm 1955). The fat
layer has been shown to be an effective barrier against heat loss in water:
a study of a fat Channel swimmer revealed that when lying still in bath
water at 18°C for more than 1 hr, he complained of no discomfort other than
boredom, but subjects with much less SC fat complained of intense discomfort
& showed a drastic drop in rectal temperature after 15 minutes (ibid.).
IOW, the possession of the fat layer facilitates spending more time in the
water, and the converse may also be true: in a study of slightly obese women
that, without dietary restriction, an hour¹s daily walking or cycling
reduced body weight by 10 and 12 % resp. after 6 months, but a daily swim
caused a weight gain of 3 % over the same period (Gwinup 1987). On land, SC
fat has the dual disadvantage of reducing speed & of acting as a heat trap.
An extra weight of fat tissue equivalent to only 10 % of body weight
seriously reduces speed. Even in temperate climates, no terrestrial animal
that has to run for its life (predator or prey) has much fat, eg, hares,
which escape predators by running, have much less body fat than rabbits,
which take refuge in their burrows.
Excess fat is a real risk to humans taking exercise, esp.in hot & sunny
environments (Austin & Lanking 1986): most land-based sports other than
walking & table tennis are up to 10 times more likely to lead to fatalities
than swimming, despite the additional danger of drowning incurred by
swimmers (Dolmans 1987). The fat layer is a handicap to effective
temperature control on-land.
Quote: in addition to kidney fat.We're not talking about couch potatoes or
caged gorillas. Human newborns have lots more fat than gazelles or
chimps.
The human mother does not lactate immediately. The fat helps the baby to
survive.
SF:
Quote: Fat is a balance
between opportunity - sufficient food - and cost -
reduced ability to avoid predators.
My boy, chimps are 10 times leaner than humans.
The leanest human is much fatter than a fat chimp.
SF:
Quote: All the Venus
statuettes prove is that some cultures in the distant
past attached some significance to fat accumulation
in females.
Your response is a classic non sequitur.
My boy, ask yourself: why would some cultures in your distant
past attach some significance to fat accumulation in females?
SFs are stupid stupid stupid... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| nickname... |
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jul 15, 7:47 am, Rich Travsky <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
Quote: nickname wrote:
On May 12, 5:35 am, "Rick Wagler" <taxid... at (no spam) shaw.ca> wrote:
"Marc Verhaegen" <m_verhae... at (no spam) skynet.be> wrote in message
Gee, Pops the problem is there is no valid reason to
charcterize hominds as "littoral mammal".
My boy,
- SC fat : not in savanna mammals
SF:
Feed 'em and see what happens. Not that much fat
in pre-industrial humans either
SFs are stupid stupid stupid: never heard of Paleolithic venuses??
Inform, my little boy, and then come back (or stay away).
Name a mammal that is physioilogically incapable
of accumulating fat sub-cutaneously.
Most long distance runners are extremely skinny but afaik still have
kidney fat. Most long distance swimmers have abundant subcutaneous fat
Obviously, you have not looked at any swim meets...
Sprinters vs long distance swimmers?
Quote: in addition to kidney fat.We're not talking about couch potatoes or
caged gorillas. Human newborns have lots more fat than gazelles or
chimps.
The human mother does not lactate immediately. The fat helps the baby to survive.
So you are saying the fat disappears by the time lactation begins?
Quote:
Fat is a balance
between opportunity - sufficient food - and cost -
reduced ability to avoid predators. All the Venus
statuettes prove is that some cultures in the distant
past attached some significance to fat accumulation
in females.
Not in monkeys or apes. Why SC fat in humans?? So they can run after
lions on the savanna?
Your response is a classic non sequitur.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| nickname... |
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jul 15, 8:57 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On Jul 6, 10:28 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 3, 7:15 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 2, 10:10 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 1, 8:41 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
nickname wrote:
On May 11, 1:59 pm, "Makouli" <m... at (no spam) work.com> wrote:
"nickname" <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:23e91c3f-4450-4b73-8422-bdca06f443a7 at (no spam) w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
See map, the site was adjacent to the oceanic bay on a creek & peat
watershed.Perfect for combined waterside ambushes and seaside
foraging, seaweed and mollusc foraging, lots of walking too..
http://the-arc-ddeden.blogspot.com/
What is it with you wet apes and your top posting?
See map above, the site was less than ten miles from salt water, other
Call it an even ten miles.
THat makes it a 20 mile round trip to go "beachcombing".
Sites nearer to the bay were obviously washed out / submerged /
flooded.
Says who, your imagination?
common sense. river enters bay connected to ocean, tides, seasonal
flooding, etc.
Do you think 10 miles walking/swimming/canoing was some enormous
undertaking for people that had traveled from Siberia?
The Anangula site wasn't washed out, why the special pleading?
You need a trip to the library to learn about sea level changes. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lee Olsen... |
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:04 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jul 16, 7:48 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote: On Jul 15, 8:57 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jul 6, 10:28 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 3, 7:15 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 2, 10:10 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 1, 8:41 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE... at (no spam) hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
nickname wrote:
On May 11, 1:59 pm, "Makouli" <m... at (no spam) work.com> wrote:
"nickname" <alas_my_lo... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:23e91c3f-4450-4b73-8422-bdca06f443a7 at (no spam) w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
See map, the site was adjacent to the oceanic bay on a creek & peat
watershed.Perfect for combined waterside ambushes and seaside
foraging, seaweed and mollusc foraging, lots of walking too..
http://the-arc-ddeden.blogspot.com/
What is it with you wet apes and your top posting?
See map above, the site was less than ten miles from salt water, other
Call it an even ten miles.
THat makes it a 20 mile round trip to go "beachcombing".
Sites nearer to the bay were obviously washed out / submerged /
flooded.
Says who, your imagination?
common sense. river enters bay connected to ocean, tides, seasonal
flooding, etc.
Do you think 10 miles walking/swimming/canoing was some enormous
undertaking for people that had traveled from Siberia?
The Anangula site wasn't washed out, why the special pleading?
You need a trip to the library to learn about sea level changes.
http://www.homepage.montana.edu/~geol445/hyperglac/isostasy1/
You need a trip to the library to learn about how former underwater
archaeological sites are found
high and dry above the waterline today. Not all underwater sites
remain buried.
Also, places like McFadden Beach deposit Pleistocene artifacts high
and dry on today's beaches
from simple wave action.
http://staa.org/event-mcfadden-1991/beach.html
THE MCFADDIN BEACH CONFERENCE, 1991
On November 15th and 16th, 1991, nearly 40 avocational archaeologists
and relic collectors gathered with a few professional archaeologists
in Port Arthur, Texas to inspect, photograph, record and discuss
prehistoric artifacts and fossil bones found at McFaddin Beach,
41JF50. The conference was organized as a result of the combined
efforts of Paul Tanner, a retired refinery foreman from Port Arthur
who had searched the beach for some 15 years, Ellen Sue Turner, and
Dee Ann Story. For decades, the beach was known to local collectors
as
a locality where projectile points, stone tools and fossils could be
found. Tanner had invited archaeologists many times to visit the site
and the collections, but his invitations elicited little response
until he contacted Sue. At Tom Hester’s suggestion, Sue contacted Dee
Ann and through the efforts of Tanner, Story and Turner, plus the
cooperation and interest of the participating collectors, a
conference
came together. All of the attending professionals (Dee Ann Story,
Dennis Stanford from Smithsonian Institution, Mike Collins, Tom
Hester, Ken Brown, Larry Banks, Don Wycoff, Richard Weinstein, Roger
Saucier and Charles Pearson) were truly impressed with the
archaeological and paleontological finds.
The Gulf of Mexico is 30 miles further offshore than it was during
the
last Ice Age when a variety of animals, (as evidenced by the
recovered
bones we saw at the conference) mammoths, mastodons, camels, large
bison, ground sloths, saber tooth tigers, etc. roamed the area. Many
of the artifacts were common to the Poverty Point culture of
northeastern Louisiana, but the artifacts from Paleoindian cultures
attracted the most interest. We documented examples of San Patrice
points in all stages of sharpening, Scottsbluff, Agate Basin, Early
Stemmed and a single Folsom point (made of Boone chert from
Oklahoma!), but the most outstanding artifacts were the nearly 100
Clovis points, typically made from Edwards Plateau chert, some
exceeding a length of 120 mm.
When Paul Tanner first contacted me, I sent copies of the El Paso
Archaeological Society’s Projectile Analysis forms as a guide line
for
the collectors and asked that he send a copy of his filled out forms
to TARL. Tanner had been keeping detailed records of the artifacts he
found since 1983, recording each find in a log book and plotting the
artifacts on a map. He encouraged and helped other collectors to do
the same and then made sure that they sent copies to the TARL
archives
also.
Today there is little left of the beach, which has all but eroded
away
into the Gulf of Mexico. In Melanie Stright’s doctoral dissertation,
SPATIAL DATA ANALYSIS OF ARTIFACTS REDEPOSITED BY COASTAL EROSION: A
CASE STUDY OF MCFADDIN BEACH, TEXAS, for the The Department of the
Interior, 1999, she acknowledged her deep gratitude for Tanner’s
help,
hospitality and access to his collection and the collections of his
friends, Murray Brown, Joe Coen, Jessie Fremont and Joe Louvier.
Without Tanner’s help, she said, “there would have been no useable
data upon which to base the study.”
Ellen Sue Turner
May 2002 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marc Verhaegen... |
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 8:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Savanna Fantast:
Quote: Not all underwater sites remain buried.
yes, at the few places where coastal sites are now above sea level, Homo
tools are found, eg, google "Walter Eritrea Acheulean reef" or so:
Bruggeman, J. Henrich, Richard T. Buffler, Mireille M. M. Guillaume, Robert
C. Walter, Rudo von Cosel, Berhane N. Ghebretensae and Seife M. Berhe. 2004.
Stratigraphy, palaeoenvironments and model for the deposition of the Abdur
Reef Limestone: context for an important archaeological site from the last
interglacial on the Red Sea coast of Eritrea. Palaeogeography,
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 203,(3-4): 179-206.
Stone tools discovered within uplifted marine terraces along the Red Sea
coast of Eritrea at the Abdur Archaeological Site, dated to 125±7 ka (the
last interglacial, marine isotope stage 5e), show that early humans occupied
coastal areas by this time [Walter et al.2000 Nature 405, 6569]. In the
present paper the stratigraphy, facies types and faunal composition from 25
measured sections of the tool-bearing Abdur Reef Limestone (ARL) are
documented in detail and interpreted to provide a palaeoenvironmental
context for the stone artefacts and a model for the deposition of the ARL.
The ARL represents a complex marine terrace sequence. Erosional surfaces
indicative of interrupted sedimentation are locally observed at two levels
within the ARL. They subdivide the complex into 3 subunits, named 5e1, 5e2,
and 5e3, representing different stages of the marine isotope stage 5e sea
level highstand, comprising 6 depositional phases (IVI) of the ARL. Subunit
5e1 begins with the initial transgression of the 5e sea level highstand
leading to the deposition of widespread lag gravels on which rich oyster
beds developed in shallow water (phase I). It further records rapid
deepening accompanied by the deposition of low-energy carbonates with scarce
corals (phase II), and later shoaling characterised by local development of
a fringing reef tract in a sedimented environment (phase III). Subunit 5e1
is capped locally by a burrowed hardground that is laterally equivalent to
depositional discontinuities, interpreted as caused by a globally recognised
mid-5e sea level low stand (phase IV). Extensive reef build-up in response
to sea level rise and improved conditions for coral growth characterises
subunit 5e2 (phase V). A possible second sea level drop during the 5e
highstand is inferred from the oyster-encrusted upper surface of subunit
5e2. Subunit 5e3 encompasses restricted coral patches that developed on the
upper surface of the underlying subunit during the last stage of the 5e
marine high stand (phase VI). 2 different toolkits are found in the ARL.
One consists of bifacial hand axes and cores of the Acheulian industry,
typically associated with the oyster beds encrusted on the transgressive lag
deposits. The other consists of Middle Stone Age (MSA)-type obsidian flakes
and blades, mainly found in the nearshore and beach environments alongside
debris from marine invertebrates and large land mammals. The distribution of
these tools suggests that foraging activities of early humans varied with
environmental setting. The Abdur Archaeological Site represents a late
example of the Acheulian/MSA transition, seen as a benchmark for early
modern human behaviour, and is, to date, the earliest well-dated example of
early human adaptation to marine food resources. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:39 pm
|
|