More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

The Western Hemisphere. General term for the Americas following their discovery by Europeans, thus setting them in contradistinction to the Old World of Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Moderators: Minimalist, MichelleH

More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby Minimalist » Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:16 pm

[url]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-evidence-suggests-stone-age-hunters-from-europe-discovered-america-7447152.html?fb_action_ids=160824060734492&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map={\"160824060734492/[/url]



New archaeological evidence suggests that America was first discovered by Stone Age people from Europe – 10,000 years before the Siberian-originating ancestors of the American Indians set foot in the New World.

A remarkable series of several dozen European-style stone tools, dating back between 19,000 and 26,000 years, have been discovered at six locations along the US east coast. Three of the sites are on the Delmarva Peninsular in Maryland, discovered by archaeologist Dr Darrin Lowery of the University of Delaware. One is in Pennsylvania and another in Virginia. A sixth was discovered by scallop-dredging fishermen on the seabed 60 miles from the Virginian coast on what, in prehistoric times, would have been dry land.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin
Minimalist
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby hardaker » Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:11 am

Hi Min,
Have to admit I was not up on this amount of material proving the Solutrean cause; and at first I thought your post was recent, not 2012. This is a prime time area that Stanford told me about in 2001, and the dredged laurel leaf. Now they found an artifact in Va. made of French flint -- truly one of the golden stakes for the Clovis undead. And all these other points Lowery found in a series of sites. Just to make sure, I am positing that Delmarva peninsula qualifies as a geographic place, i.e. a region. And that Delmarva is a Prime Time Kick-Ass Pre-Clovis region.

So anyway, before seeing your article, I had popped a headline on your news page, the Smithsonian link, before heading to the forum.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-n ... z2KCyNcDue
And so, given your posted article is over a year old, and the data goes back at least 5 years, and the dates go back 20,000yrs+, and there are multiple sites in the same general neighborhood ...

WTF Is This Pettifogging Clown Talking About??? ! The article in general pretty much glosses over the Solutrean Challenge into a chorus of, "Can we all get along?" But there is this clown at the party, head down, in the corner, with his gavel.

"Goebel, of the Texas A&M Center for the Study of the First Americans, characterizes his attitude toward pre-Clovis finds as “acceptance with reservation.” He said he’s disturbed by “nagging” shortcomings. Each of the older sites appears to be one-of-a-kind, he said, without a “demonstrated pattern across a region.” With Clovis, he adds, it is clear that the original sites were part of something bigger. The absence of a consistent pre-Clovis pattern “is one of the things that has hung up a lot of people, including myself.” "

And these are FFFFing 20,000 year old primary in situ types of sites, and they still aren't friggin' good enough??? WTF WTF WTF! !
Yo Clown! Add a 0 and call it Valsequillo. UnFFFFingbelievable. He's called a professional when he should be called a priest.
Thanks for the article. I think the best line of the article, the one that engenders the most fear and trembling to the Clovis zombies, was:
"A sixth was discovered by scallop-dredging fishermen on the seabed 60 miles from the Virginian coast on what, in prehistoric times, would have been dry land."
Chris Hardaker
The First American: The Suppressed Story of the People Who Discovered the New World [ https://www.amazon.com/First-American-S ... 1564149420 ]
hardaker
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:16 pm

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby E.P. Grondine » Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:43 am

Hi Chris -

First off, you're going to have accidental ocean crossings by all male crews. No women, no DNA survivals, unless breeding with existing C mt DNA population.

Second, while there is that one French chert, Solutrean tech went down into coastal west Africa, as I have been trying to tell you for some time. Clovis was developed by those people in South America, and spread north from there. Due to various factors, including impact fatalities, a very very very small group of descendants remains - Ocanachee and Yuchi.

Third, the Teays (sp?) River was flowing through a lot of this period. The world was quite different then, and you have ignored the possibility of round trips from the America. Without context and other remains, we just don't know.

Forth, I don't see anyone getting onto ice sheet, if there is any other environment at hand.
Too damn cold.
Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 1919
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby Minimalist » Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:46 am

First off, Chris, I love this line: "truly one of the golden stakes for the Clovis undead."

The one thing that is attributed to Stanford which I can't ever recall him saying is that this was some kind of migration. As I emailed back to the guy who sent me the link:

Stanford has previously described isolated groups of hunters working their way along the ice pack.

They did not know where they were going. They did not know where they were. They did not know why they were there. Kind of like Bush in Iraq.

They could just as easily have reached Maryland, stretched their legs, made a few new stone tools, had a bite to eat and taken a dump before sailing back. Any who did hang around could have been wiped out by Firestone’s comet/asteroid.


So insisting on some kind of cohesive pattern seems like little more than setting up a strawman to knock down.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin
Minimalist
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby shawomet » Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:20 pm

The biface dredged up off Virginia is the Cinmar Blade. While it did come up with mastodon bones, it only means they came up in the same net on a scallop trawler, so there is no real context between mastodon, and it's 20,000+ year age, and blade. Stanford and Bradley have recorded the existence of 13 such blades total now, including a total of 5 on the continental shelf.

Cinmar Blade:

http://www.bipoints.com/5.html

Sorry, don't know how to post a link you can just click on.... { Edit: Fixed it for you. Min]

Well, here's a drawing of the 5 blades found on the continental shelf. The Cinmar Blade is far left, most of you will recognize it. Illustration is taken from one of the abstracts from the Paleoamerican Odyssey. Google Paleoamerican Odyssey for full details on that important upcoming conference.
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (16.48 KiB) Viewed 7887 times
shawomet
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:14 am

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby hardaker » Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:39 pm

Min --
The Straw Man --and other fallacies was what my book was pretty much about. Likes Haynes and the invisible coal vein hypothetically running through Meadowcroft. Haynes said it was only a suggestion to explain the bad dates. But it stuck. The hypothesis alone from The Spokesman was enough to bury credibility. Haynes knew what he was doing because if he were truly honest with high integrity, he should have offered to test for coal contamination himself. He and the Clovis Mafia did the same thing at Scotty's Pendejo Cave, and Calico, and on and on. Lorenzo did it with Valsequillo. Pettifogging.
Thanks for the link shawomet; I have a lot to catch up on.

E.P.
-- “First off, you're going to have accidental ocean crossings by all male crews”
how do you know no women? At least on the second trip when there might have been an armada?
-- “Second, while there is that one French chert”: One’s pretty good.
-- "Solutrean tech went down into coastal west Africa," LINX/REFS
My guess is the Aterian were the source of Solutrean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aterian
-- “Clovis was developed by those people in South America, and spread north from there." LINX/REFS (Fell’s Cave?)
Chris Hardaker
The First American: The Suppressed Story of the People Who Discovered the New World [ https://www.amazon.com/First-American-S ... 1564149420 ]
hardaker
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:16 pm

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby uniface » Thu Feb 07, 2013 7:56 pm

While we're on questions, most of these are pretty good ones :
Benjamin Eble wrote:How come 96% of all Native American males can trace themselves back to a single genetic male, that was carrying peculiar genetic markers, on his Y-chromosome, that have been replicated in nearly every single genetic American male, born over the last 13,000 years? How come the First Americans populated the New World with distinct species of dogs that can even exhibit hairlessness as a dominant trait, and not as a recessive trait? How come scores of American males do not have armpit hair, yet just across the Pacific, in Asia, plenty of Asian women have armpit hair? How come, when a small degree of admixture occurs, between Europeans, and genetic Americans, the subsequent effects - such as mustaches, and body hair - can be seen for many generations -even when the degree of admixture is actually quite small? How come native Americans, on both continents, tend to exhibit such an adverse reaction to alcohol, while their "neighbors", in Asia, historically were never affected, in the same manner? How come almost the entire South American continent is composed of almost a single blood type - type O? How come the First Americans left both a distinctive fluting technology, and a distinctive blade/core technology, in both North and South America? Why did the people of Monteverde exhibit a phenomenal wood working technology, that involved planking wood, with perfectly fashioned planes, that were used in construction?

http://www.arrowheadology.com/forums/ar ... ricas.html
uniface
 

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby E.P. Grondine » Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:47 am

Okay, uniface, I'm up for it, and will make some wild *** gueses

Benjamin Eble wrote:How come 96% of all Native American males can trace themselves back to a single genetic male, that was carrying peculiar genetic markers, on his Y-chromosome, that have been
replicated in nearly every single genetic American male, born over the last 13,000 years?


Because their Y DNA was susceptible to a common mutation.

Benjamin Eble wrote:How come the First Americans populated the New World with distinct species of dogs that can even exhibit hairlessness as a dominant trait, and not as a recessive trait?


Think of Desmond Morris, then think of "The Naked Wolf". :lol:

Benjamin Eble wrote:How come scores of American males do not have armpit hair, yet just across the Pacific, in Asia, plenty of Asian women have armpit hair?


Asian men like armpit hair?

Benjamin Eble wrote:How come, when a small degree of admixture occurs, between Europeans, and genetic Americans, the subsequent effects - such as mustaches, and body hair - can be seen for many generations -even when the degree of admixture is actually quite small?


Because facial hair is a dominant Y DNA allelle?

Benjamin Eble wrote:How come native Americans, on both continents, tend to exhibit such an adverse reaction to alcohol, while their "neighbors", in Asia, historically were never affected, in the same manner?


Well, there was no sugar cane, and fermentation was developed late here.

Aside from that, perhaps Americans did not like the effects of alcohol on them, and found it useless.

Benjamin Eble wrote:How come almost the entire South American continent is composed of almost a single blood type - type O?


I did not know that. I've never looked at the distribution of blood types, but my guess would be the Rio Cuarto impact event.

Benjamin Eble wrote:How come the First Americans left both a distinctive fluting technology, and a distinctive blade/core technology, in both North and South America?


covered earlier. Sorry for the lack of easy links, Chris.

Benjamin Eble wrote:Why did the people of Monteverde exhibit a phenomenal wood working technology, that involved planking wood, with perfectly fashioned planes, that were used in construction?


Because working wood was useful to them. :mrgreen:

I give myself 100% on this pop quiz. Your results may vary.
Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 1919
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby E.P. Grondine » Fri Feb 08, 2013 1:18 am

Sorry shawomet, but I will be unable to attend. There's this pack of "impact experts" I have to deal with.
Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 1919
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby shawomet » Fri Feb 08, 2013 9:57 am

Try again. This is the Cinmar Blade, one of 5 bipoints found on the continental shelf..

http://www.bipoints.com/5.html
shawomet
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 9:14 am

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby hardaker » Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:05 pm

About Fermentation in the Americas, there were a number of traditions.

History of alcoholic beverages
Pre-Columbian America

Several Native American civilizations developed alcoholic beverages. Many versions of these beverages are still produced today.

Pulque, or octli is an alcoholic beverage made from the fermented juice of the maguey, and is a traditional native beverage of Mesoamerica. Though commonly believed to be a beer, the main carbohydrate is a complex form of fructose rather than starch. Pulque is depicted in Native American stone carvings from as early as AD 200. The origin of pulque is unknown, but because it has a major position in religion, many folk tales explain its origins.

Balché is the name of a honey wine brewed by the Maya, associated with the Mayan deity Acan. The drink shares its name with the balché tree (Lonchocarpus violaceus), the bark of which is fermented in water together with honey from the indigenous stingless bee.

Tepache is a mildly alcoholic beverage indigenous to Mexico that is created by fermenting pineapple, including the rind, for a short period of three days.

Tejuino, traditional to the Mexican state of Jalisco, is a maize-based beverage that involves fermenting masa dough.

Chicha is a Spanish word for any of variety of traditional fermented beverages from the Andes region of South America. It can be made of maize, manioc root (also called yuca or cassava) or fruits among other things. During the Inca Empire women were taught the techniques of brewing chicha in Acllahuasis (feminine schools). Chicha de jora is prepared by germinating maize, extracting the malt sugars, boiling the wort, and fermenting it in large vessels, traditionally huge earthenware vats, for several days. In some cultures, in lieu of germinating the maize to release the starches, the maize is ground, moistened in the chicha maker's mouth and formed into small balls which are then flattened and laid out to dry. Naturally occurring diastase enzymes in the maker's saliva catalyzes the breakdown of starch in the maize into maltose. Chicha de jora has been prepared and consumed in communities throughout in the Andes for millennia. The Inca used chicha for ritual purposes and consumed it in vast quantities during religious festivals. In recent years, however, the traditionally prepared chicha is becoming increasingly rare. Only in a small number of towns and villages in southern Peru and Bolivia is it still prepared.

Cauim is a traditional alcoholic beverage of the Native American populations of Brazil since pre-Columbian times. It is still made today in remote areas throughout Panama and South America. Cauim is very similar to chicha and it is also made by fermenting manioc or maize, sometimes flavored with fruit juices. The Kuna Indians of Panama use plantains. A characteristic feature of the beverage is that the starting material is cooked, chewed, and re-cooked prior to fermentation. As in the making of chicha, enzymes from the saliva of the cauim maker breakdown the starches into fermentable sugars.

Tiswin, or niwai is a mild, fermented, ceremonial beverage produced by various cultures living in the region encompassing the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. Among the Apache, tiswin was made from maize, while the Tohono O'odham brewed tiswin using saguaro sap. The Tarahumara variety, called tesgüino, can be made from a variety of different ingredients. Recent archaeological evidence has also revealed the production of a similar maize-based intoxicant among the ancestors of the Pueblo peoples.

In addition, the Iroquois fermented sap from the sugar maple tree to produce a mildly alcoholic beverage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... an_America
Chris Hardaker
The First American: The Suppressed Story of the People Who Discovered the New World [ https://www.amazon.com/First-American-S ... 1564149420 ]
hardaker
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:16 pm

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby Minimalist » Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:32 am

-- “Second, while there is that one French chert”: One’s pretty good.


One is amazing unless you think it migrated by itself.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin
Minimalist
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby E.P. Grondine » Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:01 pm

Thanks for the short summary, Chris. According to contact accounts, the technology of fermentation had spread north. I actually has one "expert" lecture me about the complete lack of fermented products several years ago. (PS - Would you check your messages?)

min, there is a difference between contact, contacts, and "migration".
Usually people believe what they want to believe until reality intrudes.
User avatar
E.P. Grondine
 
Posts: 1919
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:36 am

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby Minimalist » Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:49 am

Agreed and I can't ever recall Stanford suggesting "migration."
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin
Minimalist
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: More Evidence to Support the Solutrean Hypothesis

Postby uniface » Tue Feb 12, 2013 8:55 pm

FWIW :

Richard "Scotty" Macneish excuvated a place call Pendrjo Cave 35 miles east to Orogrande New Mexico. There was a water event 19,000 years ago and below that they found clay lined fire pits with finger prints in the clay, you can tell human finger prints by the sweat pores under a microscope. they have fire pits, charcoal, and pieces of wood that date back 30,000 years. If your are interested in Pendejo Cave, you can google the El Paso Archaeological Society and get a DVD of a lecture they gave on the cave. Another thing I forgot, they found some human hair bundles below 19,000 years ago and did DNA on them and they are human and not related to the Native Americans.

http://www.arrowheadology.com/forums/arrowheads-news/38329-when-did-humans-come-americas-7.html
uniface
 

Next

Return to New World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest