Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa? At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Or what caused CMs to disappear. It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC. Why is this?

2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 12/05/2008 06:34:
Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa?  At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens?  Or what caused CMs to disappear.  It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC.  Why is this?

Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm

--
p.a.

On May 12, 3:21 am, Peter Alaca <p.al... at (no spam) purple.invalid> wrote:
2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 12/05/2008 06:34:
Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa? At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Or what caused CMs to disappear. It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC. Why is this?
Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm

--
p.a.

We still call them cro-magnon. Clash of the Caveman: Neanderthal vs.
Cromagnon was recently released on the history channel.
I understand that lots of people want to be politically correct, but
what's typically thought of as a cro-magnon is alot more robust and a
good bit taller than a Natufian or Solutrean. Some cro-magnons even
have neanderthal traits, suggesting hybridization. I haven't heard
that about mungo men, Solutreans, or Natufians, roughly their
contemporaries. So what is so wrong with giving a distinct people a
distinct name? It's a very useful name, I think.

good bit taller than a Natufian or Solutrean. Some cro-magnons even
have neanderthal traits, suggesting hybridization. I haven't heard

On May 12, 3:21 am, Peter Alaca <p.al... at (no spam) purple.invalid> wrote:
2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 12/05/2008 06:34:
Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa?  At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens?  Or what caused CMs to disappear.  It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC.  Why is this?

Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm

--
p.a.

We still call them cro-magnon. Clash of the Caveman: Neanderthal vs.
Cromagnon was recently released on the history channel.
I understand that lots of people want to be politically correct, but
what's typically thought of as a cro-magnon is alot more robust and a
good bit taller than a Natufian or Solutrean. Some cro-magnons even
have neanderthal traits, suggesting hybridization. I haven't heard
that about mungo men, Solutreans, or Natufians, roughly their
contemporaries. So what is so wrong with giving a distinct people a
distinct name? It's a very useful name, I think.

On Thu, 15 May 2008 08:14:04 -0700 (PDT), in sci.archaeology, J.LyonLayden
wrote:

On May 12, 3:21 am, Peter Alaca <p.al... at (no spam) purple.invalid> wrote:
2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 12/05/2008 06:34:
Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa? At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Or what caused CMs to disappear. It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC. Why is this?
Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm

--
p.a.
We still call them cro-magnon. Clash of the Caveman: Neanderthal vs.
Cromagnon was recently released on the history channel.
I understand that lots of people want to be politically correct, but
what's typically thought of as a cro-magnon is alot more robust and a
good bit taller than a Natufian or Solutrean. Some cro-magnons even
have neanderthal traits, suggesting hybridization. I haven't heard
that about mungo men, Solutreans, or Natufians, roughly their
contemporaries. So what is so wrong with giving a distinct people a
distinct name? It's a very useful name, I think.

'You' may, a lot of the media may, but archaeologists/anthropologists have
virtually abandoned the word. It's a useless name, applied to all sorts
of different groups.

You mention the History Channel. The channel with programs on Ancient
Egyptian helicopters. Don't believe anything you see there without
confirmation from more reliable sources.

On Thu, 15 May 2008 08:14:04 -0700 (PDT), in sci.archaeology, J.LyonLayden
wrote:



On May 12, 3:21 am, Peter Alaca <p.al... at (no spam) purple.invalid> wrote:
2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 12/05/2008 06:34:
Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa? At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Or what caused CMs to disappear. It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC. Why is this?

Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm

--
p.a.

We still call them cro-magnon. Clash of the Caveman: Neanderthal vs.
Cromagnon was recently released on the history channel.
I understand that lots of people want to be politically correct, but
what's typically thought of as a cro-magnon is alot more robust and a
good bit taller than a Natufian or Solutrean. Some cro-magnons even
have neanderthal traits, suggesting hybridization. I haven't heard
that about mungo men, Solutreans, or Natufians, roughly their
contemporaries. So what is so wrong with giving a distinct people a
distinct name? It's a very useful name, I think.

'You' may, a lot of the media may, but archaeologists/anthropologists have
virtually abandoned the word. It's a useless name, applied to all sorts
of different groups.

You mention the History Channel. The channel with programs on Ancient
Egyptian helicopters. Don't believe anything you see there without
confirmation from more reliable sources.

Doug
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'athttp://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site:http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderatorhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/

2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 17/05/2008 18:22:

On May 17, 4:33 am, Doug Weller <dwel... at (no spam) ramtops.removethis.co.uk



wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2008 08:14:04 -0700 (PDT), in sci.archaeology, J.LyonLayden
wrote:

On May 12, 3:21 am, Peter Alaca <p.al... at (no spam) purple.invalid> wrote:
2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 12/05/2008 06:34:
Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa? At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Or what caused CMs to disappear. It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC. Why is this?
Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm
We still call them cro-magnon. Clash of the Caveman: Neanderthal vs.
Cromagnon was recently released on the history channel.
I understand that lots of people want to be politically correct, but
what's typically thought of as a cro-magnon is alot more robust and a
good bit taller than a Natufian or Solutrean. Some cro-magnons even
have neanderthal traits, suggesting hybridization. I haven't heard
that about mungo men, Solutreans, or Natufians, roughly their
contemporaries. So what is so wrong with giving a distinct people a
distinct name? It's a very useful name, I think.
'You' may, a lot of the media may, but archaeologists/anthropologists have
virtually abandoned the word. It's a useless name, applied to all sorts
of different groups.

You mention the History Channel. The channel with programs on Ancient
Egyptian helicopters. Don't believe anything you see there without
confirmation from more reliable sources.

also, CM seems to have racist connotations. if you look up CM on
youtube, you see all kinds of pro-white videos. the CM people are
idealized as a "uber race" of people because they were from europe and
were quite tall and genocidalists (since they wiped out
neandertals).

Did they?

Btw: why would you look up Cro-magnon on youtube?

--
p.a.

On May 17, 4:33 am, Doug Weller <dwel... at (no spam) ramtops.removethis.co.uk
wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2008 08:14:04 -0700 (PDT), in sci.archaeology, J.LyonLayden
wrote:



On May 12, 3:21 am, Peter Alaca <p.al... at (no spam) purple.invalid> wrote:
2.7182818284590... wrote: on, 12/05/2008 06:34:

Could it have been possible for Cromagnons to have been found in Asia,
Middle East, or Africa? At what point did Cromagnons give way to
modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Or what caused CMs to disappear. It
seems that modern day historians refer to CMs from the period
preceding ~15,000 BC. Why is this?

Why Don't We Call Them Cro-Magnon Anymore?http://archaeology.about.com/od/earlymansites/a/cro_magnon.htm

We still call them cro-magnon. Clash of the Caveman: Neanderthal vs.
Cromagnon was recently released on the history channel.
I understand that lots of people want to be politically correct, but
what's typically thought of as a cro-magnon is alot more robust and a
good bit taller than a Natufian or Solutrean. Some cro-magnons even
have neanderthal traits, suggesting hybridization. I haven't heard
that about mungo men, Solutreans, or Natufians, roughly their
contemporaries. So what is so wrong with giving a distinct people a
distinct name? It's a very useful name, I think.
'You' may, a lot of the media may, but archaeologists/anthropologists have
virtually abandoned the word. It's a useless name, applied to all sorts
of different groups.

You mention the History Channel. The channel with programs on Ancient
Egyptian helicopters. Don't believe anything you see there without
confirmation from more reliable sources.

also, CM seems to have racist connotations. if you look up CM on
youtube, you see all kinds of pro-white videos. the CM people are
idealized as a "uber race" of people because they were from europe and
were quite tall and genocidalists (since they wiped out
neandertals).

also, CM seems to have racist connotations.  if you look up CM on
youtube, you see all kinds of pro-white videos.  the CM people are
idealized as a "uber race" of people because they were from europe and
were quite tall and genocidalists (since they wiped out
neandertals).

On May 17, 12:22 pm, "2.7182818284590..." <tangent1... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:

also, CM seems to have racist connotations. if you look up CM on
youtube, you see all kinds of pro-white videos. the CM people are
idealized as a "uber race" of people because they were from europe and
were quite tall and genocidalists (since they wiped out
neandertals).

So? That's not the person who coined the term's fault. History Channel
might not be a great source, but YouTube is worse.
Cr-magnons were pretty uber, though. The vatrious peoples formally
described as Cro-Magnons were taller, stronger, more robust, and
bigger brained than us. They had the highest technology to date. But
mainly what made various prehistoric humans 'Uber" was the lack of the
agriculture disease, which devastates the health of a species in its
early forms.
I don't believe that they wiped out the neanderthals through genocide.
It was much too slow for that. But there are plenty of obvious
hybrids. The gene theory is mute. We have no way of knowing whether
the last carrier of a "hybrid gene" died out 23,000 ybp or 100 ybp, or
whether there's one in some remote corner of the world that we haven't
tested yet even to this day. We might not even know if we found one,
because every neanderthal variation of dna has probably not been
preserved for archeologists to find.
Mungo man's genes are also extinct, like neanderthals, but he's
considered a AMHS. No wait, he's a AMHS/soloensis hybrid. No wait, he
really is a AMHS. Hard to keep up with the current political
correctness.