A set of fossil human footprints or "ichnites" on a beach at Claromecó on the Southern coast of Buenos Aires Province, in Argentina was dated to 30,000 years BP according to a paper.
Located 200 km northeast of the northern tip of Patagonia on the Atlantic coast between Bahia Blanca and Necochea, the human prints were associated with other prints of megafaunal animals.
The paper (Azcuy, C. L.; Carrizo, H. A.; Tonni, E. P.; Panarello, H.; Amenábar, C. R. 2021. "Late Pleistocene fossil hominid tracks on the beaches of Claromecó, Argentina". Acta Geológica Lilloana 33 (2): 43-57. doi: https://doi.org/10.30550/j.agl/2021.33.2/2021-08-03) states:
"Fossil ichnites of hominids found in Argentina are identified and described. The age of the sediments was determined using radiocarbon dating, by Uranium, OSL and paleomagnetic signatures of the sediments, along with an analysis of the associ-ated megammalian tracks and their fossil bones. We conclude that the fossil ichnites dated about 30 ka BP."
The evidence for an early peopling of America continues to grow
Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2025 by Austin Whittall ©
Hello Austin, your post is indeed amazing…
ReplyDeleteThese tracks (and particularly footprint #3) seem to be strikingly similar to human made ones… However, due to the unusual relevancy they could have, it would be wise to carefully explore for any possibility of natural processes to be responsible for their formation…In this sense, it must be considered that calcium carbonate-based formations (like the one that bears these tracks) are susceptible to local dissolutions of their main component; calcium carbonate (Ca3CO2), and it was observed that this natural mechanism can sometimes cause dips of the most capricious shapes…So, this last is precisely the argument the researchers need imperiously to rule up, in order to better support the authenticity of their claims…
Respect to the geological context; an extensive research is here presented, plenty of diverse and interesting information…Unfortunately, for some incomprehensible reason, the conclusions the authors arrive to appear, in my opinion, to lack consistency…While the layer bearing the tracks is rightly identified as a “wackestone plane”; a type of geological formation supported by a matrix of Ca3CO2, and it is rightly correlated with a low energy environment developed into the intertidal zone of a beach (thus implicitly admitting that a marine ingression event was involved in its genesis)…at the time to define a tentative antiquity for these findings, they propose an age at aprox 30 Ka; a disconcerting conclusion for a geological context that looks very “marine like”…that hardly (for not saying, never) could have taken place at the Caracolero beach during Late Pleistocene times (since aprox 115 Ka up to 12/13 ka), period within which the sea level remained at several tens of meters below current ones…
What I would be almost 100% sure of, is that if these “depressions” are really impressed tracks, they could only be printed during a marine ingression event. Provided that an Holocene age for this context (during MIS1 ingression, ca. 6Ka) could be discarded if we rely on the claimed fact that the bones of Megatherium (an extinct megamammal), shown in Fig 6a-b, were found associated with this very layer…then, the antiquity for these tracks should be considered “at least” equivalent to the previous marine ingression (MIS5e, Sangamon event, “Belgranense” etc, ca. 120 Ka), a conclusion that would be reasonably consistent, particularly if a proper interpretation of the package of datings is done… Why do I remark “at least”?...Because of the not so reckless possibility that this “wackestone plain” could be representative of an even earlier marine event interleaved into Pleistocene sediments (events that are highly suspected to have occurred within this period, although their evidences has been scarce up to now). At this respect, some observations made on Fig 1b could suggest that Caracolero site would be a somewhat “atypical” MIS5e outcrop…as the wackestone plain bearing the tracks is outcropping a not much more than 1 m a.s.l. (meters above sea level), while most (if not all) manifestations of MIS5e marine ingression along Buenos Aires province coastline, can only be found at altitudes greater than +5/+6 m a.s.l… and additionally, it appears to be directly overlying very old layers; as those broken and eroded remains of cliffs that can be seen near sea level, are nothing other than the relicts of the old Pampean continental substrate, whose eroded roof at levels near 0 m a.s.l. (precisely what we see in Fig 1b), could perfectly be as ancient as from Matuyama magnetic ages (ca. 0,78 Ma - 2,58 Ma), according to several magnetostratigraphic studies performed along the above mentioned coastline. What I mean is that even when MIS5e may look as the most feasible geological context…it could not be the only possible one.
So, if these very suggestive findings are real footprints, and not natural reliefs…there seems to be no way for them to be younger than 120 Ka old…
Agree with your last paragraph; there are more and more attempts to break barriers in this sense…
Best regards
Marcelo
Thank you Marcelo!
ReplyDeleteVery interesting comment. Yes. They could be natural, the erosion of a rock due to water, wind, sea grinding with sand, etc.
And the date, indeed, the 30,000 years could easily be far older. Your analysis is very good. At 120,000 years, they would imply an early arrival of modern humans or even Neanderthals to South America. Which is an interesting possibillity!