Article on possible pre-clovis people...

[Jon Phillips]

Neat article on Live Science....I haven't seen it posted on here yet....

Fisherman Pulls Up Beastly Evidence of Early Americans

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Red Earth]

Yeah. I read that yesterday. Very interesting

 

[ptsofnc]

Recently bought/read the book Across Atlantic Ice. Very interesting read. The prehistory of North and South America is fascinating, mysterious, and we might not yet know as much as we think we do.

 

[redbeardrelics]

Nice link, and I agree that those interested in the subject should get a copy of the book "Across Atlantic Ice". It is interesting that on the link above, the counter argument against a pre Clovis "Solutrean" peopling of the Americas, is based upon a so called lack of DNA evidence. The counter argument against the "lack of DNA evidence", is probably too politically incorrect to discuss here.

 

[rock]

Its a discussion that should be done. There are some tools found that some don't know what they are because they don't flow to the normal artifacts as we know now. I think it would be very interesting to see some of the artifacts found from the members on the forum that we don't know all the reasons they were made.

 

[unclemac]

remember too, these two things were pulled up out of context from the sea floor in a fishing net....how many times have we on this forum, seen where some metal detectorist dug up a projectile point as he was digging a "hit"... clearly in those instances the artifacts have no relationship to each other.

..and not to stir the pot but DNA evidence is pretty conclusive stuff. And not to step on any toes but....clovis sites are well documented, all fall into a certain age range, are often directly associated with extinct animal remains and have a HUGE north american range...both interior and coastal.

these pre clovis sites are interesting but unlike clovis, controversy surrounds them all.

 

[Red Earth]

Controversy surrounds anything that isn't the standard way of thinking. If people don't think outside the box then we would still be living in trees and caves.
Its extremely important to examine this issue as much as possible, hunt for more remains, run tests, compare artifacts and be open minded.

 

[Charl]

At last count, there was 12 such bipoints gathered together by Stanford and Bradley. One was from a Providence, RI collection. Two are made of French flint.

Here is the one that was spotted in a RI collection with photo below:

http://cart.occpaleo.com/boatsbladepaleobifacecast.aspx


"This exquisite biface has just been cast by Occpaleo in June 2012. It measures 6 and half inches long(167mms) and is about 50 mm wide and is only around 5mm thick at the widest point. It was noticed in a private collection in Rhode Island, by archaeologist Jack Hranicky, a prolific author and expert on point types of the Eastern US. Being aware of the new theories about a possible Solutrean(coastal Spain/France) origin for the Clovis culture in the East, Hranicky brought this biface to the Smithsonian Museum in June 2012 to be examined there. This biface shows the same technology of the Cinmar biface, which was showcased in the new book Across Atlantic Ice by Stanford and Bradley. The Cinmar biface was dredged up 40 miles off the coast of VA, along with mastadon tusks and bones dating over 20,000 years old. This newly discovered biface from Rhode Island shows the same flaking technique of using edge to edge and overshot flakes to thin the biface, and appears to be of the same technological background. This newly re-discovered biface is one of the best examples known of the type being studied by archaeologists who are open to the idea of a possible Clovis/Solutrean connection."

http://asaa-persimmonpress.com/book_review_bipoints-before-clovis.html

http://www.bipoints.com/1.html

BTW, not trying to "take sides" in this debate. It is interesting that there are solid dates of 26,000 years from the Delmarva, but everything is up in the air anyway at this point. There are older dates from South America then North America. I've been told that at the Santa Fe conference, their presentation made a very compelling case for associating the bones with the Cinmar Blade despite the apparent lack of context. One of the French flint bipoints was found beneath a colonial chimney foundation; they can't rule out a colonial origin for that one. The second of the two bipoints made of flint from France was broken in two and found in a trash pit at the Browning Farm site excavation, Eppes Island, Virginia in 1980.

 

[Jon Phillips]

remember too, these two things were pulled up out of context from the sea floor in a fishing net....how many times have we on this forum, seen where some metal detectorist dug up a projectile point as he was digging a "hit"... clearly in those instances the artifacts have no relationship to each other.

..and not to stir the pot but DNA evidence is pretty conclusive stuff. And not to step on any toes but....clovis sites are well documented, all fall into a certain age range, are often directly associated with extinct animal remains and have a HUGE north american range...both interior and coastal.

these pre clovis sites are interesting but unlike clovis, controversy surrounds them all.

Yep...I did it myself. An 1840-ish piece of buckshot just inches away from 13 archaic points.


However...I look at any of the U.S. Clovis site maps, and the concentration is heavy on the east coast, and very light in the northwest. If they were non existent in the northwest, I would say that it could be explained by the fact that the northwest might have been covered in ice, and there was a very rapid migration to the east coast, but there are some sites in the Midwest, and northeast...just no major concentration. I would think that there would be an even distribution, or even a heavier distribution in the area of first migration, until those areas were exhausted, or over-crowded...and further migration occurred. Maybe they were just more careful with their stuff, until they got to the east coast??


I don't know what is true, and there is definitely controversy with the Solutrean theory...but I believe there is more to ancient U.S. history than what we have figured out just yet.

 

[rock]

I don't think they really want to have to rewrite our history books. I believe there were people here long before we actually know about. Its just a matter of time before they have to admit it to the public.

 

[Red Earth]

These are solutrean tools. I have a piece at home that is just like the one circled except the very tip is broke off

 

[RelicDude]

I read this article on face book a few days ago its fascinating. And to think it was found in the 70s and we didn't hear about it until now. Makes me wonder what other treasures are hidden away at the smithsonian that we don't know about.

Sent from my iPod touch using TreasureNet

 

[Charl]

I read this article on face book a few days ago its fascinating. And to think it was found in the 70s and we didn't hear about it until now. Makes me wonder what other treasures are hidden away at the smithsonian that we don't know about.

Sent from my iPod touch using TreasureNet

Well, actually, that's the odd part. This discovery and implications was reported in the press years ago. I've seen that odd fact discussed on other forums. Nobody can understand why this reporter is so far behind the times or what made this reporter think this was news!. This story came out when Stanford and Bradley were just releasing Across Atlantic Ice. You can likely find numerous archived news stories describing this. Also, remember, although the discovery itself of the Cinmar Blade happened decades ago, the understanding of what that blade might represent is fairly new, so you would not expect that understanding in the 70's.

 

[Wyoming Valley Relics]

I remember hearing the solutrean theory at least 15 years ago, so its by no means a new idea, just finally getting some traction in the media. I think the real problem with proving where the pre-clovis came from, whether from asia or europe, the best evidence is lost on the sea floor .