Ancient hominins (the ancestors)

Arts & Sciences Culture & History
21

Not sure the Spanish interpretation of those sites is credible.

22

Probably going to want to work some account of the neolithic agricultural revolution in there.

23

When I click on that article, Google inserts this advertisement just below the heading “But What Did They Look Like?”:

image

4 Likes
24

Yes, I was going to say vessels that should get from A to B are not always the same as vessels that can/do get from A to B.

1 Like
25

I got an @ notification for this post, for some reason. :idunno:

26

Yes, that’s the cave I mentioned in the OP!
https://www.archaeology.org/news/3270-150507-siberia-denisovan-bracelet

I was going to point something out to you but then decided I didn’t care enough about the point, so I removed it right after…

1 Like
27

Well, it’s hard for the Astralo-Melanesians to get to Easter-island by the open sea voyaging when they didn’t manage to get to Vanuatu before the Austronesians.

It is possible that they didn’t really need ships to get to Australia from present-day Indonesia if the climate between two glacial maximums fluctuated enough to cause the sea-level to drop dramatically for a period. From there they could get to Papua by circumventing the Wallace Line.

Let’s remember plenty of mammals and even Homo floresiensis made it to Southeast Asia 25 thousand years before the first ancestor of Astralo-Melanesians reached those islands. The island Flores is also beyond the Wallace line.

3 Likes
28

I thought it’s been shown that the sea level didn’t drop that far, and the migrations to Australia must have been waterborne. Wouldn’t Asian animals also have migrated into Australia if the crossing was doable by land?

1 Like
29

There’s a theory that crocodiles swam to the Americas.

30

:clap::clap::clap::clap::writing_hand::writing_hand::writing_hand::woman_technologist::woman_technologist::ocean::trophy::dart:

31

And vice versa?

Perhaps the land bridge was not complete; doable if you’re a tallish human standing on your hind legs, but not if you’re built low to the ground (and don’t have the brains to think “I wonder what’s on the other side of this dangerous-looking bit of quicksand?”).

32

I think the theory was they had good enough seafaring skills for short hops but not really open ocean navigation skills . Makes sense.

1 Like
33

Thanks for the article.

34

Assumptions that species before could do something are as factual as those that state they couldnt. Always good to keep a good open mind and dont just assume everyhing other thanu u s were retarded by small brains.and lack of will.

These kinds of science aare fascinating.in the fact how little we all realize we know… its afact until we find another skull fragement.

35

Maybe we should just call it 'animal intelligence '.
I mean anybody who ever owned a dog can tell they are intelligent and able to understand what we are thinking or going to think (hence the guilty look when you walk in the house and you haven’t even seen the damage yet ).

2 Likes
36

The other interpretation of that article is that humans aren’t nearly as clever and special as we think.

8 Likes
37

Going a little further back in time

38

Further back than I was thinking for this thread, but still pretty cool. Just think of those primitive primates with little sailor hats, adorable!

3 Likes
39
4 Likes
40

For sure. However, humans are pretty clever and curious. Intelligent has yet to be proven based on a species level assesment. That isnt to say we havent dont intelligent things, just that we dont often do intelligent hungs. The arrogance with us humans is whats most instersting to science and how we evolved via not giving a flying phuck :slight_smile: