Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Human migration and 115,000 year old foot prints

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Human migration and 115,000 year old foot prints


    Archaeologists Found 115,000-Year-Old Human Footprints Where They Shouldn't Be


    https://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...ation-history/
    Last edited by gregszybala; 09-24-2020, 04:00 PM.
    Searching the fields of Northwest Indiana and Southwestern Michigan

  • #2
    Interesting,...But I might be looking at animal prints, I can’t tell...Thanks for link
    Floridaboy.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think I just read something about similar findings in America (not as old, but way older than Clovis). Must look. Your stuff always making me think; this is good b/c memory needs exercising .
      Digging in GA, ‘bout a mile from the Savannah River

      Comment


      • #4
        A spotlight on the mortal coil - it's up & out I think! LOL!



        Sting unplugged: Tea in the Sahara - Walking on the moon..


        Click image for larger version  Name:	LittleBigFoot.JPG Views:	0 Size:	129.3 KB ID:	490491
        Last edited by Olden; 09-25-2020, 09:33 AM.
        If the women don\'t find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.

        Comment


        • #5
          I guess I lack imagination. If those photos are the best evidence they can provide well....
          Perhaps they should look for a fry pan.
          Last edited by Ron Kelley; 09-25-2020, 09:46 AM.
          Michigan Yooper
          If You Don’t Stand for Something, You’ll Fall for Anything

          Comment


          • CMD
            CMD commented
            Editing a comment
            I hear ya, lol. Elsewhere I read: “ Almost 400 tracks were left by animals, including a wild ass, a giant buffalo, elephants, and camels. Only seven were confidently identified as human footprints. But by comparing the size and shape of these tracks with those made by modern humans and Neanderthals, the researchers conclude the tracks were likely made by people with longer feet, taller stature, and smaller mass: Homo sapiens, rather than Neanderthals, as they report today in Science Advances.”

            Ichnologists are the name of specialists who study trace fossils, including footprints of everything from 500 million year old trilobites to....humans. You might be surprised at what they are able to deduce from even prints like those. We have a deposit in the 300 million year old Rhode Island formation with all kinds of reptile, amphibian, insect, millipede, etc., tracks. I would have a very difficult time even spotting them sometimes, but folks into ichnology are really good at what they do.

          • Fat
            Fat commented
            Editing a comment
            I have an imagination I cant turn off and Im not buying it.

        • #6
          Interesting article.
          Near the PA/Ohio state line

          Comment


          • #7
            I was staring at the photo for a long time maybe an ape at best .

            Comment


            • #8
              Here is the actual paper. I have collected at trace fossil sites in the Upper Carboniferous Rhode Island Formation. Ichnology is not easy, and requires a great deal of experience. I collected with a man who was an expert in insect trace fossils. I would not have found one example if I were in the field by myself. I had a hard enough time recognizing the amphibian and reptile trace fossils, including examples of footprints with tail drag, toe prints made in sediment while swimming, all kinds of variables. It’s like anything else. You have to develop an eye for it. Same thing with people who pick up rocks that they mistakenly think are artifacts. They have not developed an eye for it.
              At any rate, the paper on the Arabian Peninsula prints is free at the moment:

              https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont.../eaba8940.full
              Rhode Island

              Comment


              • Fat
                Fat commented
                Editing a comment
                Why wont you address my issue?

              • CMD
                CMD commented
                Editing a comment
                No, Fat, I deleted my comment because it was too antagonistic. I should not have been overly confrontational.

              • Fat
                Fat commented
                Editing a comment
                So apologize accepted. I guess. Thanks for clearing that up. We can’t always be correct.
                I hope this all doesn’t ruin your day and your dog or spouse takes the “brunt” of your emotions, especially your dog.

            • #9
              Thanks for posting this Greg. But I think I'll bow out of this one. Kim
              Snyder County Pennsylvania

              Comment


              • #10
                Why won’t you address my issue?
                N.E Colorado, Nebraska panhandle

                Comment


                • #11
                  Originally posted by Fat View Post
                  Why won’t you address my issue?
                  I’m not sure what your issue was, beyond your statement that your imagination is unable to “buy” the interpretation of the tracks. I posted a link to the paper so that we at least all have the information provided by the authors, and not simply a summary in a popular venue. If, the paper is still lacking from your point of view, you are entitled to your opinion. Beyond that, you can always elaborate at exactly what you are “not buying”. If you have considerable expertise in interpreting trace fossils, and wish to present your objections based on your experience with trace fossils, that would be helpful. If it’s no more than an inexperienced opinion, that’s fine too, if you have a problem with things that I post, since I notice you also objected to a Popular Mechanics article I posted, posted for the simple purpose of introducing members to the background behind an interactive map of tribal territories at the time of Contact, then simply ignore any of my threads or comments. I did not post the interactive map in Surfacehunter’s “Local Tribes” thread, and the Info Center, in order to make a political statement. So, if this all boils down to having a problem with me, fine, I will stay away from your comments and threads, and you can take the same approach to my comments and threads.

                  My apologies to Greg for disrupting this thread. It is an interesting discovery, which I find especially interesting given my fascination with trace fossils in general. Human trace fossils are the most interesting, IMHO.

                  Rhode Island

                  Comment


                  • Fat
                    Fat commented
                    Editing a comment
                    I have a problem with the word ,”indigenous” and “native” unless of course, you are referencing me.
                    Two things I admire in Canada are,
                    1. They are the most courteous drivers on the road. There can be alot of traffic up there on the “two lane highways” and they pull over and brake and help “you” pass.
                    2. They call there “first people” just that.
                    I think the terminology in the article “raises“ flags with me and that turns me “off” before the author gets started.

                    I have “NO” “ill will” towards you personally. I feel as if this internet “stuff” is still all “new” to me. Im not even sure who you are?

                • #12
                  This was simply something of interest I placed here that I thought others might find of interest. Nothing more, nothing less. Many of us post links to articles and papers written by others that we think all or some here might find interesting. Don't turn it into something it isn't Fat. If you find it not to your liking or not of interest move on. Nobody was trying to make you feel bad.
                  Searching the fields of Northwest Indiana and Southwestern Michigan

                  Comment


                  • Fat
                    Fat commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Its getting harder to keep track of the two different topics with all the same Replys
                    If you looksee the other one, I think I have them both covered.
                    I’m sry if I scared you.
                    You dont make me feel bad about me, I feel bad about you.
                    NEXT please...

                  • gregszybala
                    gregszybala commented
                    Editing a comment
                    This coming from the guy that won't write a legible sentence. So your just here to be a troll or not, because you are doing a darn good job of being the former. The need to make it personal, it's too bad.

                • #13
                  Negative(the mold, left), and positive(the cast,right) of fossil amphibian footprints, from Plainville, Ma. I know there is a program that would let me outline the actual tracks, forget what that common program is even called, but, imagine you’re in the field collecting these, and actually expected to recognize what you’re looking at. I have seen really clear examples, and have a couple, but this is closer to average.

                  Click image for larger version

Name:	2B68B0E9-129B-4AF9-A219-337257D285A0.jpeg
Views:	53
Size:	206.7 KB
ID:	498077

                  On the positive half, you can see the roundish heel impression near the center here. The tiny line off a bit to the left of that heel impression is the thumb. You can see elongated lines representing a couple of digits extending in front of the heel. I never developed the eye you need to be good at instantly recognizing these trace fossils. Partly because the commercial quarry where these are found was closed to public fossil collecting years ago. ButI got to watch someone who was really good at it, enough to realize it was the same as recognizing artifacts. Practice and development of an eye for what you want to find...

                  Click image for larger version

Name:	F8DB78CD-6368-4F11-BD6E-F285A15316A1.jpeg
Views:	47
Size:	160.1 KB
ID:	498078



                  Rhode Island

                  Comment


                  • #14
                    Click image for larger version

Name:	6AEB4D9A-397E-438D-B39D-BF4F5A5598C5.jpeg
Views:	39
Size:	32.0 KB
ID:	498084My sky has a halo going on now.
                    N.E Colorado, Nebraska panhandle

                    Comment


                    • #15
                      Fat commented


                      Yesterday, 09:13 AM

                      So apologize accepted. I guess. Thanks for clearing that up. We can’t always be correct.

                      "I hope this all doesn’t ruin your day and your dog or spouse takes the “brunt” of your emotions, especially your dog."


                      Fat this is totally uncalled for. The man apologized . In my opinion he did not even need to do that as he had done nothing wrong. If you keep it up you will leave me no choice . Fair warning to you . I ban folks who attack other members on here and make it personal. I will give you a little time to edit your comment. you must also apologize to the forum for this passive aggressive comment toward Carlie. If it is here in a few hours and I see you have been logged in during that period of time I will take action and you will be read only.
                      TN formerly CT Visit our store http://stores.arrowheads.com/store.p...m-Trading-Post

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X