tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8137409915847697670.post7204778440598418840..comments2024-03-17T18:41:00.382-03:00Comments on Patagonian monsters: Oldest human footprint in the Americas, in Chile 16 KyaAWhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11389280995003336103noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8137409915847697670.post-69291702847793895832019-05-15T19:47:41.560-03:002019-05-15T19:47:41.560-03:00Very interesting entry!. This footprint is an amaz...Very interesting entry!. This footprint is an amazing and unquestionable proof of a somewhat earlier presence in the region, and the documentation of the hole site seems pretty well presented. It is evidence that will be hard to deny<br />As you rightly point, this dating of 15,6 Ka (which is still post-LGM) is another one that violates the barricade built and defended by the orthodoxy (which since two decades or so, is at Monte Verde II, 14,5 Ka)…but this is a fact at which we are accustomed today.<br />Your open questions, precisely formulated, go directly to the point I would like to comment on;<br />…”Why should we assume that they were new arrivals?”…<br />At a first glance, I would say that we shouldn´t , but if the term “new ”refers to a recently arrived immigration, actually we can´t rule up this possibility… people who crossed Behring at terminal Pleistocene, travelled to the South via coastal route (perhaps the only feasible way to avoid the ice during the MIS2 peak of the Wisconsin glaciation), and arrived at Pilauco at 15,6 Ka…it would not be impossible.<br /> But if they did so, I think that what we should assume, with minimal risks of being wrong, is that, simply …these people reached a land that was already inhabited since long before.<br />So, they perhaps could have been “new” immigrants…but not the first ones.<br />…”Couldn´t these people have reached Chile 20, 25, or even 100 ka ago?”…<br />I speculate that not only they could reach Chile well before 15 Ka… almost surely, they did.<br />An idea of this last can be inferred from some paragraphs into T. Dillehay´s papers, particularly “New archaeological evidences for human presence at Monte Verde, Chile” ,2015. In this paper (available free at PLOS ONE) he documents excavations of deeper strata at Monte Verde I and Chinchihuapi site, where he shows very suggestive findings, among them; two samples of wood charcoal associated with burned features, with datings of 23/22 and 33 Ka respectively, and a piece of animal skin, from the basal layer of MV I, dated at 43,5 ka. He also ensures that these C14´s were reliable, consistent with OSL´s, and that these sediments were not disturbed. But even so, he considered that the data in these deeper layers was still too meager and inconclusive in order to substantiate any serious evidence of human activity…(¿¿??)<br /> So, it´s highly probable that old cultural remains, well beyond the 14,5 Ka dating of MVII, can be found in this region…a fact that Dillehay knows well.<br />Marcelo Bruyerehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05485948808541641877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8137409915847697670.post-72023225063604081652019-05-13T01:08:44.905-03:002019-05-13T01:08:44.905-03:00Who is still clinging to the 13,000 year date of e...Who is still clinging to the 13,000 year date of entrance. No one, because most scientist know Naia, Arlington Springs Woman, Anzick, are all 13,000 yr or older. Their ancestors had to have been in the vicinity alot earlier.NKent805https://www.blogger.com/profile/06311041906627739245noreply@blogger.com