21 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseBoats must have been one of the earliest technologies out there. Humans got around!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/science/16archeo.html?em
Thousands of stone age tools found much much older than the 11,000 year old remains thought to be the earliest. It is evidence they had to have come by boat! They may not even have been modern humans!
The people of the Pacific Islands, like Hawaii, really amaze me.
21 Feb 10
Originally posted by AThousandYoungbut they were fully modern humans, 10,000 years back maximum. 130,000 years ago, they were people with brains a lot smaller than ours.
Boats must have been one of the earliest technologies out there. Humans got around!
The people of the Pacific Islands, like Hawaii, really amaze me.
21 Feb 10
Originally posted by sonhouseAre you 100% sure of that?
but they were fully modern humans, 10,000 years back maximum. 130,000 years ago, they were people with brains a lot smaller than ours.
I'm currently reading Stephen Oppenheimers - Out of Eden - The Peopling of the World, in which there is a section on human skull sizes. And i quote -
Significantly, both Neanderthals and those modern humans living before the last ice age 20,000-30,000 years ago had rather bigger brains than do people living today.
21 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobThat is modern history compared to 130,000 years ago, they were probably a different species. The early ancestors for sure had less brain mass. Apparently enough to make boats though.
Are you 100% sure of that?
I'm currently reading Stephen Oppenheimers - Out of Eden - The Peopling of the World, in which there is a section on human skull sizes. And i quote -
Significantly, both Neanderthals and those modern humans living before the last ice age 20,000-30,000 years ago had rather bigger brains than do people living today.
Also, they think the stone tools found may be as much as 700,000 years old! Further work is needed of course, to come up with a date that old but the style of stone cut is that old.
23 Feb 10
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/geopedia/People_of_the_Pacific
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/03/people-pacific/anderson-ask-expert
Q: Some attribute Pacific migration to luck, others to purposeful exploration using noninstrument navigation. What is your opinion concerning how Pacific travelers were able to colonize the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean?
A: ...
24 Feb 10
Originally posted by zeeblebotA combination of both.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/geopedia/People_of_the_Pacific
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/03/people-pacific/anderson-ask-expert
Q: Some attribute Pacific migration to luck, others to purposeful exploration using noninstrument navigation. What is your opinion concerning how Pacific travelers were able to colonize the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean?
A: ...
24 Feb 10
Originally posted by sonhouseMeaning that something was making stone tools that long ago. Why not boats? Besides, one can make a basic crossing in the Mediterranean on little more than a log, why do they assume they were boat builders?
Further work is needed of course, to come up with a date that old but the style of stone cut is that old.
24 Feb 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadI'd like to see you cross the Mediterranean on a log.
Meaning that something was making stone tools that long ago. Why not boats? Besides, one can make a basic crossing in the Mediterranean on little more than a log, why do they assume they were boat builders?
According to the article,
'“We can’t say the toolmakers came 200 miles from Libya,” Dr. Strasser said. “If you’re on a raft, that’s a long voyage, but they might have come from the European mainland by way of shorter crossings through Greek islands.”
But archaeologists and experts on early nautical history said the discovery appeared to show that these surprisingly ancient mariners had craft sturdier and more reliable than rafts. They also must have had the cognitive ability to conceive and carry out repeated water crossing over great distances in order to establish sustainable populations producing an abundance of stone artifacts.'
24 Feb 10
Originally posted by sonhouse"The 130,000-year date would put the discovery in a time when Homo sapiens had already evolved in Africa, sometime after 200,000 years ago. Their presence in Europe did not become apparent until about 50,000 years ago."
but they were fully modern humans, 10,000 years back maximum. 130,000 years ago, they were people with brains a lot smaller than ours.
24 Feb 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadI wouldnt recommend crossing the Adriatic on a log let alone the Med!! Where did you get this nonsense from???
Meaning that something was making stone tools that long ago. Why not boats? Besides, one can make a basic crossing in the Mediterranean on little more than a log, why do they assume they were boat builders?
24 Feb 10
Originally posted by PalynkaI don't think you can see one island from another all the way to Crete. 130,000 years is a long time in human history but they would have been almost the same position as now. I wonder if the med was not as deep then? If so, the land masses would have been higher up and more visible from a distance.
It doesn't seem that hard to go from Greece to Crete by raft, to be honest. Let's not forget that we're talking ranges of millennia here. I think you'd only need to travel between islands that can be seen from shore on a clear day. Far, yes, but not outlandish.