CPTBILs mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

pip,

I have mentioned a number of times that your knowledge would be valuable in this conversation. It's more than welcome by me. You have taken the discussion in a new direction, which is a good thing.

We are talking about Homo sapiens here. Pangaea existed over 200,000,000 years ago.....I believe. The first primates evolved around 60,000,000 years ago.

Is there some archaeological evidence for any migration of humans earlier than 50,000 years ago? I understand plant, marine and mammal, but it's man that we are interested in.

Thank you for your input, I look forward to more of it.

Joe

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

pip,

"....the physical reality could be people were here at the time the continent of Pangaea split into what we now live upon".

Wouldn't you have to make a slight adjustment to the chronology of mankind, for this to be possible?

Thank you,

Joe

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

pip,

"i realize my input is not desired...alternative opinions based on fact is not often accepted."

You often make these kinds of complaints. You don't feel your posts get the respect you feel they deserve. Personally, I don't actually disagree with that.

You injected yourself into a conversation that was "pretty much" two guys having a good time, with a bit of applause for a derisive remark by Jose. You followed that up with some unique, self generated, facts that place humans on the earth millions of years before primates.

I would love to see you stay in the conversation. I will give you back the same respect you give to me. If you stick with what you know, instead of desperatly trying to make me look foolish, you can add a lot to the discussion. I hope you choose to do that.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Furness]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Hi all

Oro yes i agree with you on this, the number of Aborigines in Australia when the white man arrived was close to one million that was after thousands of years gradually colonising the continent, and even then most were in the coastal area's where there was water and food,
i also cannot believe that the much smaller number that there would have been earlier could wipe out a species by burning the scrub or other vegetation that was still standing,

i don't think the marsupial lion and other carnivores would be hunted for food, very few if any tribes do that unless there is insufficient herbivore species and even then it is generally only part of the animal that is used for food, although through circumstance one or two tribes may have to do it,
the aborigines were hunter gatherers not slash and burn to grow crops so any fire would be used sparingly to drive prey into a trap and mostly small prey at that, i would think any of the larger nasties would only be hunted if they were a threat to the tribe or the village,

and as you say more likely to have disappeared because of climate change, effecting their main prey Aus has never had as large and diverse species such as you find on other continents possibly because of its early isolation from the super continent and being the first to break away,

its more likely climate change cut the numbers of the larger predators main prey and as the continent dried out in the centre both species declined equally,

Australia has few inland rivers except during flash floods but large artesian basins where the rain when it falls soaks down into, so although its there it can't be used by any animals so they relied on smaller and smaller areas for both food and water,

also the southern land bridge as you pointed out is not really feasible because of the distance and amount of open water that would need to be crossed and its cold and rough down there, even in summer except for short periods between the gales and storms,

the hypothesis that they were spread out before Pangea split is also not really on for the reason that Joe mentioned,

it broke apart gradually a lot earlier than mans appearance, but still joined by land bridges,
DNA indicates that we are descended from the first tribe that arose in the rift valley in Africa, differences are down to isolation and time,

if we had appeared all over the diffrent continents at diffrent times we would not have the same DNA marker rather like many monkeys whilst still monkeys cannot interbreed otherwise over the millenia they would have evolved through interbreeding into one species,
mainly because they also inhabit a much smaller area than humans,

for the Aborigines to have inhabited Aus they would have to have been one of the first splinter groups to have moved away from the rift valley and got to Aus before the distance was to great, for anything larger than a dug out canoe, possibly the Aus land bridge being the first to break as it is recognised as being the oldest continent,
hence the animal and plant species there following a diffrent path to most of the other species on the planet

whilst the rest of the continents were still joined ( more or less ) by land bridges like pearls on a necklass, allowing for early plant and animal migration,
where as Aus had completely split away,

its likely that most of the tribes only moved away from the rift valley gradually as pressure for food mounted, with only the odd group going any distance,

these are just my thoughts on it, and no doubt there will be many things i have missed and got wrong ,

furness

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Furness,

I believe you are correct on all counts, including the evidence pointing to the Rift Valley.

Very nice posts. Like Roy, you obviously know what you are talking about.

Take care,

Joe

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Pip,

Does this mean you don't really want to discuss your theory on Pangaea anymore?

I would copy and paste one of your posts from here:

http://www.thelostdutchmangoldmine.com/pb/viewforum.php?f=8

But it's almost impossible to find more than a few words, which when strung together, would be allowed on this site.

Your unrelenting attacks on me over there, have resulted in a constant mental spanking, which you seem to require, and desire, on a daily basis. You have made the effort to bait me into angry replies here, but those days are over. I simply state the facts, while you give us, to say the least.......unusual theories.

Anyone who would like to compare our posts on the LDM Forum is more than welcome.

As I have said, if you want to discuss topics with me, I will reply in the same way you treat me. What is allowed on the LDM
"First Amendment Forum", would get you banned from this one.....quickly.

Let's go back to questioning your theory on people from Pangaea being the first humans in the Americas.
This assumes it was a well thought out theory on your part, rather than an unthinking derisive, and disruptive, barb into a very friendly conversation.

I look forward to your reply,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Roy,

Doesn't the fact that Clovis were not the oldest peoples in the Americas, change the entire discussion as to how the first Amerindians arrived here? It seems to me that Monte Verde is the real story, as opposed to comparing the Siberian cultures to the Nanena.

Perhaps we should start from another point of view.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

HOLA amigos,

I hope we can get past our personal differences, some very interesting theories have been presented and it would be interesting to explore them. We all seem to have at least one common interest – a love for history!

Cactusjumper wrote

Doesn't the fact that Clovis were not the oldest peoples in the Americas, change the entire discussion as to how the first Amerindians arrived here? It seems to me that Monte Verde is the real story, as opposed to comparing the Siberian cultures to the Nanena.

Perhaps we should start from another point of view

Yes it does – and Monte Verde is a most puzzling site. How did Australoid people reach America so far back in time? Why have no traces of these people been found in North America? (so far as I am aware) Is that an indication of their route to South America? What happened when Australoid peoples encountered Asiatics? The climate of South America at that time was notably different from North America too – is that an important factor? I have many more questions, it seems when we find one fact it only serves to raise many more questions.

I even wonder if the Australoid migrations traveled west-to-east as has been proposed, or perhaps the opposite direction. Australoid peoples lived in Madagascar for example, off the SW coast of Africa – are we going to say that they also migrated “west to east”? More questions.

Pippinwhitepaws wrote

since no one knows the age of creation, and we do know Pangaea existed, why is it necessary to identify an imaginary migration, as the physical reality could be people were here at the time the continent of Pangaea split into what we now live upon.
<snip>

i realize my input is not desired...alternative opinions based on fact is not often accepted.

That is a very interesting idea amigo, and would explain many things. Was man here on Earth at that time? There have been some anomalous finds of what certainly appears to be extremely ancient humans present when there should not have been any - <example extract>

“Anomalous Finds at Tuolumne Table Mountain
Finds from mine shafts can be dated more securely than those from hydraulic mines and surface deposits of gravel. Many shafts were sunk at Table Mountain in Tuolumne County. Whitney and others reported that miners found stone tools and human bones there, in the gold-bearing gravels sealed beneath thick layers of a volcanic material called latite.
Discoveries from the auriferous gravels just above the bedrock are probably 33.2 to 55 million years old. The more important discoveries from Table Mountain add up to a considerable weight of evidence. J.D. Whitney personally examined a collection belonging to Dr. Snell, consisting of stone spoons, handles, spearheads, and a human jaw - all found in the auriferous gravels beneath the latite cap of Tuolumne Table Mountain. Whitney remarked that all the human fossils uncovered in the gold-mining region, including this one, were of the anatomically modern type.
Writing 11 years before the discovery of the Java ape-man, Pithecanthropus erectus, Whitney concluded that, "Man, thus far, is nothing but man, whether found in Pliocene, Post-pliocene, or recent formations."
“
http://www.mcremo.com/door4.htm

I hope you will expound on this idea, thank you in advance.

Furness – excellent post, you are completely correct. What do you think about the theory of Java man reaching Australia? (I cannot recall the name of the person who proposed it, it is online somewhere ) Thank you in advance,

And – thank you all for the very interesting and enlightening discussion. For a while it was only two of us keeping this going, but it always is better when more of us will join in the discussion. Like others here – I come here to learn and talk with friends, discuss things that you could not talk with the locals at the neighborhood saloon etc. I always learn, but do not often remember to thank you friends for educating me. Thank you and I hope you all have a great day!
Your friend,
Oroblanco

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Good morning mi sheep luvin historian: You posted -->

'We all seem to have at least one common interest – a love for history!'
~~~~~~~~~~

Speak for yourself, I am interested in L O O T !!! It is far more interesting to study History with a full tummy. Snicker.


As for the age of man, I vaguely remember that in the beginning of the bible, it casually mentions that the LORD wasn't satisfied with his original work with the world, so he remade it.

Does this mean that mankind was around since the first making, then had to start over ?? If so, this would tend to explain the OOP thingies.

But then there is Lucy, or is she ?

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Good morning Roy,

I would approach any information which includes J.D. Whitney with some skepticism. There is as much evidence for a hoax, as there is for authenticity. Not so much on his part, personally, but helped along by his (seemingly) frantic desire to prove the existence of man.......before man existed.

Much of the impetus behind his efforts seemed to stem from his anti-religion beliefs. Personally, I believe he was probably the victim of a hoax, perpetrated by the miners.

All of the above is personal opinion, and could be completely wrong......factually.

Take care,

Joe

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Roy,

This is a bit long but, IMHO, it is worth reading:

From Chapter 10 of, "Man before Adam: The Story of Man in Search of His Origins." by Robert Silverberg, we find this:

[The attentive reader, by this point, may be troubled about the geography of fossil man. We have talked of ancient men from Germany and France, from Java and China, from England, from South Africa, from East Africa, from Algeria. We have said nothing at all, though, of fossil discoveries made in North or South America. Not a word about an American Pithecanthropus, an American Neanderthal, an American species of Australopithecus.

There is a very sound reason for this apparent neglect. Man came late to the Western Hemisphere. He was Homo sapiens when he got here. His arrival dates back no more than 30,000 years, so far as we know today, human evolution happened elsewhere; man in the Americas was strictly an imported product.

The evidence for this is negative, but impressive in its negativeness. No one has ever found a fossil human of a pre-sapiens hominid in the Western Hemisphere. Moreover, no fossil apes have been found, either. No higher primates at all inhabit or ever inhabited the Americas, so far as we know, except for the tailed monkeys of South America and that recent immigrant, Homo sapiens.

There are some who have thought otherwise. In 1866, for example, a fossilized human skull with fairly prominent brow ridges was found at a depth of 130 feet in a gold mine in California. The place was Calaveras County, which Mark Twain immortalized with his story of the Jumping Frog. The Calaveras skull was found under four levels of lava and three of gold-bearing gravels, and at the very least seemed to date from Tertiary times. Then as now, Pliocene man, dating back three or four million years, was a newsworthy discovery.

J. D. Whitney, a leading geologist of the day, inspected the Calaveras skull and the mine where it had been found, and concluded, in a report to the California Academy of Natural Sciences, that the skull was genuinely Tertiary. Another Whitney report fourteen years later, in 1880, expressed the same opinion. The Calaveras skull was widely deplored because it seemed to disprove by its great age the teachings of the Bible and to back the ideas of that subversive Englishman, Charles Darwin.

Alas for J. D. Whitney and his reputation, later research showed the Calaveras skull to be a fraud. The anthropologist Ales Hrdliccka checked into the story at the beginning of this century, and found that the miners had dug the skull out of recent strata and had buried it in the Pliocene levels as a prank. Hrdliccka produced other skulls from California caves which looked just as ancient as the Calaveras skull, but which dated back only two or three thousand years. So much for Tertiary man in California!

About the same time as Hrdlicka was debunking the Calaveras skull, an Argentinian paleontologist named Fiorino Ameghino was claiming to have found Tertiary primates on the pampas-early Tertiary at that. Ameghino came forth with the bones of various creatures that he gave such names as Homunculus patagonicus, Anthropops perfectus, and so on. They were, he said, ancestors of man and the higher apes, and he worked out elaborate family trees to prove it. Wiser men showed that Ameghino's fossils were those of fairly recent monkeys, and that his theories were pathetic figments of a deluded imagination.

In 1922, another fossil anthropoid came out of Nebraska. A tooth discovered in Pliocene formations there was said to belong to a creature called Hesperopithecus, which combined aspects of Pithecanthropus, Homo sapiens, and the chimpanzee. Five years later came an embarrassed correction: the celebrated molar actually was that of Prosthenops, an extinct pig! Other fossil finds in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries turned out similarly to be false alarms. Not only were pre-sapiens human fossils totally absent in the Americas, but Homo sapiens himself did not seem to go back more than a few thousand years at most. It was generally agreed that man had come to the New World across the Bering Strait, which separates Alaska from Siberia and is only fifty-six miles wide. The ancestors of the Indians might have crossed the strait in boats, or even on foot, crossing on winter ice, perhaps.

One school of thought held that man had come here ten or fifteen thousand years ago, toward the end of the Fourth Ice Age. Because glaciers had drawn up much of the world's water supply then, sea level was much lower, and shallow Bering Strait was probably completely dry. Man could have walked across from Siberia.

But opponents of this idea, led by Ales Hrdlicka, said no. Man in the Americas was extremely recent, Hrdlicka insisted. Beginning in 1907 with the publication of his Skeletal Remains Suggesting or Attributed to Early Man in North America, the brilliant, fiery, dogmatic Hrdlicka set himself up as the enemy of any theory of man's antiquity here. First he demolished Ameghino and the Calaveras skull. Then he went after each successive find of so-called primitive men in the Americas. Hrdlicka's papers bristled with phrases like "not in the least primitive," "essentially modern," "not to be distinguished from the modern Indian." From his office in the Smithsonian he insisted that no proof had ever been offered that man had reached the Americas much before the time of Christ.

Hrdlicka's work was valuable, because it cleared away a great deal of error, confusion, and downright fraud. But as he grew older his opinions hardened into prejudices. His attacks grew more emotional. And other scientists began to wonder whether the peppery dean of American physical anthropology was completely correct. By the 1920's, everyone agreed with Hrdlicka that man had come to the Americas in the form of Homo sapiens. But had the first Indian arrived only three or four thousand years ago, as Hrdlicka said?]

This book is well worth reading for anyone interested in the history of man.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Old Dog]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Sometime back, when BB was dominating subjects of this sort,
I posted a picture of some Aztec pictogliphs in West Canyon by Vernal UT.
if I can find them again I will repost.

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

O.D.,

Was this the picture?:

There was another one that I recall, which was a face......I think.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Cubfan64]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

O.D.,

Was this the picture?:

There was another one that I recall, which was a face......I think.

Take care,

Joe

Joe - I think that was one that Somehiker posted but I'm not positive

 

[Furness]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Hi All,

Oro, Joe, thank you for the compliments on my posts i enjoy both of yours equally, and for the same reason,
although you are both far more knowledgeable on a lot more subjects than i will ever be,

Hi Oro,

no i don't think java man made it to Australia, the only evidence for his existence is the skull found by Dubois, there are still arguments over exactly if they are a species of man, the leg bone has been proven to be that of a modern human and the teeth those from an orangutan, and although not proven, its believed that the skull is from a large gibbon or baboon,

the skulls of aborigines are more like a Neanderthal than the jutting jaw of java man (if the skull proves to be genuine)

if i have got my time scales correct with regards both the ice ages and exodus of man from the rift valley any tribe coming out of the Rift valley would only be able to go in a few directions before hitting the ice sheet that covered most of the northern hemisphere at this time, there would be very little land north of Africa, following it round it would come down as far as the middle of France right round the northern hemisphere including the northern stans to the Himalayas in effect a corrider leading eastward,

with just the large southern area of India some would head south and occupy that area, but as with any where they stayed for any length of time would depend on climate and water game and fruit for food ,

but many still going eastwards until they reached Burma then southwards to Sumatra java and crossing the land bridge which is the Timor sea and even now is quite shallow
the rise in seas mentioned by Joe would be a short time after the Aborigines reached Aus,

at this time or slightly before, thus further north the melting of the ice would slowly allow the tribes to then go into what is now northern Europe and further east the stans and north of the Himalayas through corridors in the mountins like the swat valley, through Tibet up into the Mongolian plains, and into china,

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

there was a piece on NPR 'science friday' today...about the hobbits...how these homonids had stone tools 800,000 years ago...
sure puts some question n the air about habitation of the planet...no way for them to get to the island, but float...a long way...
the guy said they road a tsunami...lolol...

'best guess going' is sure a favorite phrase in anthropology.

 

[Old Dog]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Joe,
the pix I was referring to were suplimented by one of your own of the same site.
They are as follows...
I didn't post yours as I hadn't asked you

Thom

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Thom,

Thanks for the reminder. CRS set in some time ago, and that's the best excuse I can remember.

Hope all is well with you.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Old Dog]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

I do quite well old friend,
over worked, as usual,
but still able to toe the mark when the bell rings

LOL
Thom

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: CPTBIL's mention of Aztec pictographs in SE Arizona

Roy,

If you remove Clovis from the "first people" equation for the Americas, it certainly opens up a very large door. That door has been blocked by most archaeologist's over the years, but two of the most ardent guards were Junius Bird and Tom Lynch. Another famous defender of Clovis first, was Ales Hrdlicka, who was involved in the Adolph Ruth case.

The major difference between the first two, and Ales Hrdlicka, was that he dealt with the facts that were present at the time, and they simply turned their backs on any evidence showing the existence of pre-Clovis people in this hemisphere. That was not an unusual stance.

pip wrote:

"there was a piece on NPR 'science friday' today...about the hobbits...how these homonids had stone tools 800,000 years ago...
sure puts some question n the air about habitation of the planet...no way for them to get to the island, but float...a long way...
the guy said they road a tsunami...lolol..."

Can't believe I missed that. While no expert, I do know a little about the hobbits and would love to discuss the subject with anyone who is familiar with the history.

Take care,

Joe