History/Archaeology Thread

Nucks

RT History Department
Joined
Sep 2, 2007
Messages
4,462
niMic said:
I don't really know anything about the argument in question, but this just struck me as a very sketchy thing to say.

That is not in any way, shape or form evidence. Unless there are other things that back it up, and make it more likely than the prevalent theory, it's not really relevant.

What specifically are you thinking about?
Click to expand...
Basically, roughly 12,000 years ago the end of the Pleistocene resulted in a very large increase in sea levels. This means that most settlements that may have existed in this time frame would be lost to the ocean. This doesn't say they existed. It means, we wouldn't find them even if they did.

One of the chief arguments regarding the start date for "civilization" is that there is essentially no physical evidence. This is not to say there is no evidence. However this evidence tends to be dismissed as anomalous and attributed to primitive hunter gatherer society. They do this, because there is no evidence of widespread settlement. Sort of a catch-22 here.

Again, any major settlements from that time frame would almost certainly be coastal, and they would now be underwater. On top of that, after a certain period of time, all you might expect to find are monolithic structures. The argument that the Sphinx predates the Old Kingdom is a parallel situation. We see the entire situation in microcosm here. Regardless whether one believes the theory or not isn't relevant. Egyptologists dismiss the theory out of hand as nonsense. They are academically staked in an orthodox view they are experts in. Some geologists on the other hand support the science behind the theory which seems to make the Sphinx and its compound several thousand years older that is currently accepted.

Returning to the other point.

1) Over geological time, if there was a civilization in this time period, the majority of it would be lost.
2) Established academia is extremely resistant to radical changes. If you've staked your career on one concept, and suddenly it is proven that you are wrong. You're not the expert you once were.

I'm not saying there is any grand conspiracy here. I just think that even if overwhelming evidence suggesting that civilization existed ~12,000 BCE was found. It would be very difficult for this evidence to be accepted and interpreted in a non-biased manner.

Not finding a major archaeological site from a period in time when the ocean level was as much 100 feet lower present levels is not shocking. It seems like academic pursuit in this case has been pushed to the fringe, and there is an established orthodoxy regarding things like "when civilization began".
 

Crustanoid

New Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
18,511
I was listening to a program today which discussed the chances that archaeology is in danger of becoming an elitist, rich person's pastime because of the cuts to funding and services restricting opportunities for volunteering (and also because of a move towards 'paying to volunteer')

Another reason to want to punch the Tories repeatedly around the face with a trowel.
 

SteveJ

all-round nice guy, aka Uncle Joe Kardashian
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
62,851
Humanity’s Last Invention and our Uncertain Future

In 1965, Irving John ‘Jack’ Good sat down and wrote a paper for New Scientist called Speculations concerning the first ultra-intelligent machine. Good, a Cambridge-trained mathematician, Bletchley Park cryptographer, pioneering computer scientist and friend of Alan Turing, wrote that in the near future an ultra-intelligent machine would be built.

This machine, he continued, would be the “last invention” that mankind will ever make, leading to an “intelligence explosion” – an exponential increase in self-generating machine intelligence. For Good, who went on to advise Stanley Kubrick on 2001: a Space Odyssey, the “survival of man” depended on the construction of this ultra-intelligent machine.
Click to expand...
“At some point, this century or next, we may well be facing one of the major shifts in human history – perhaps even cosmic history – when intelligence escapes the constraints of biology...”
Click to expand...
http://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogs...itys-last-invention-and-our.html#.ULQIfeRvt5c
 

MrMarcello

In a well-ordered universe...
Joined
Dec 26, 2000
Messages
52,793
Location
On a pale blue dot in space
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/local_...dy-actually-proves-the-existence-of-sasquatch

Sasquatch DNA evidence: New DNA study actually proves the existence of Sasquatch
•By: Mark Johnson, newsnet5.com

CLEVELAND - "Its looking very squatchy here!"

That's a quote from the popular cable show called "Finding Bigfoot." In it, a team of Sasquatch hunters comb North America looking for the elusive hairy, man-like creature. They have yet to find one.

Well, now, science may be lending a helping hand by proving that the creature actually does exist.

According to PRweb.com, a team of scientists, using samples of strange, unknown hair, found in the wild, have confirmed the existence of a novel hominin hybrid species, commonly called “Bigfoot” or “Sasquatch,” living in North America.

Researchers’ extensive five-year DNA sequencing study suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate species.

The study was conducted by a team of experts in genetics, forensics, imaging and pathology, led by Dr. Melba S. Ketchum of Nacogdoches, Texas. In response to recent interest in the study, Dr. Ketchum can confirm that her team has sequenced three complete Sasquatch nuclear genomes and determined the species is a human hybrid:

“Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from purported Sasquatch samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species. Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.

Hominins are members of the taxonomic grouping Hominini, which includes all members of the genus Homo. Genetic testing has already ruled out Homo neanderthalis and the Denisova hominin as contributors to Sasquatch mtDNA or nuDNA.

“The male progenitor that contributed the unknown sequence to this hybrid is unique as its DNA is more distantly removed from humans than other recently discovered hominins like the Denisovan individual,” explains Ketchum.

“Sasquatch nuclear DNA is incredibly novel and not at all what we had expected. While it has human nuclear DNA within its genome, there are also distinctly non-human, non-archaic hominin, and non-ape sequences. We describe it as a mosaic of human and novel non-human sequence. Further study is needed and is ongoing to better characterize and understand Sasquatch nuclear DNA.”

Ketchum is a veterinarian, whose professional experience includes 27 years of research in genetics, including forensics. Early in her career, she also practiced veterinary medicine and she has previously been published as a participant in mapping the equine genome. She began testing the DNA of purported Sasquatch hair samples five years ago.

Ketchum calls on public officials and law enforcement to immediately recognize the Sasquatch as an indigenous people:

“Genetically, the Sasquatch are a human hybrid with unambiguously modern human maternal ancestry. Government at all levels must recognize them as an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights against those who would see in their physical and cultural differences a ‘license’ to hunt, trap, or kill them.”

Full details of the study will be presented in the near future when the study manuscript publishes.
 

utdalltheway

Sexy Beast
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
20,507
Location
SoCal, USA
that's what I was thinking. if it's a hybrid where is the evidence of the original primate? found any fossils lying around? maybe bigfoot hid them.
 

Keltoi

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
3,187
Location
- Is tír gan teanga, tír gan anam.
I love history as a whole but what really interests me is stuff like Easter Island and the Pyramids, I mean stuff that modern Historians say should've been impossible to build, yet they did it some how!
 

TheSamulator

classic sam. they love me, tbh
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
12,462
Location
Väinämöinen
I've been to the Pyramids and they are even more impressive up close. The size of just one block is mind blowing, never mind how they managed to get fecking hundreds of them arranged like that!
 

Penna

Kind Moderator (with a bit of a mean streak)
Staff
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
49,689
Location
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est.
IrishCelt93 said:
I love history as a whole but what really interests me is stuff like Easter Island and the Pyramids, I mean stuff that modern Historians say should've been impossible to build, yet they did it some how!
Click to expand...
I spent a couple of days on Easter Island once. The scenery is like Devon in many respects, except for the Spanish-speaking and the statues (and the heat, of course).

A strange and mystical place. The most interesting bit is the quarry, with all these half-finished statues just sticking out of the rock. Why were they left like that?
 

JustAFan

The Adebayo Akinfenwa of football photoshoppers
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
32,377
Location
An evil little city in the NE United States
MrMarcello said:
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/local_...dy-actually-proves-the-existence-of-sasquatch

Sasquatch DNA evidence: New DNA study actually proves the existence of Sasquatch
•By: Mark Johnson, newsnet5.com

CLEVELAND - "Its looking very squatchy here!"

That's a quote from the popular cable show called "Finding Bigfoot." In it, a team of Sasquatch hunters comb North America looking for the elusive hairy, man-like creature. They have yet to find one.

Well, now, science may be lending a helping hand by proving that the creature actually does exist.

According to PRweb.com, a team of scientists, using samples of strange, unknown hair, found in the wild, have confirmed the existence of a novel hominin hybrid species, commonly called “Bigfoot” or “Sasquatch,” living in North America.

Researchers’ extensive five-year DNA sequencing study suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate species.

The study was conducted by a team of experts in genetics, forensics, imaging and pathology, led by Dr. Melba S. Ketchum of Nacogdoches, Texas. In response to recent interest in the study, Dr. Ketchum can confirm that her team has sequenced three complete Sasquatch nuclear genomes and determined the species is a human hybrid:

“Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from purported Sasquatch samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species. Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.

Hominins are members of the taxonomic grouping Hominini, which includes all members of the genus Homo. Genetic testing has already ruled out Homo neanderthalis and the Denisova hominin as contributors to Sasquatch mtDNA or nuDNA.

“The male progenitor that contributed the unknown sequence to this hybrid is unique as its DNA is more distantly removed from humans than other recently discovered hominins like the Denisovan individual,” explains Ketchum.

“Sasquatch nuclear DNA is incredibly novel and not at all what we had expected. While it has human nuclear DNA within its genome, there are also distinctly non-human, non-archaic hominin, and non-ape sequences. We describe it as a mosaic of human and novel non-human sequence. Further study is needed and is ongoing to better characterize and understand Sasquatch nuclear DNA.”

Ketchum is a veterinarian, whose professional experience includes 27 years of research in genetics, including forensics. Early in her career, she also practiced veterinary medicine and she has previously been published as a participant in mapping the equine genome. She began testing the DNA of purported Sasquatch hair samples five years ago.

Ketchum calls on public officials and law enforcement to immediately recognize the Sasquatch as an indigenous people:

“Genetically, the Sasquatch are a human hybrid with unambiguously modern human maternal ancestry. Government at all levels must recognize them as an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights against those who would see in their physical and cultural differences a ‘license’ to hunt, trap, or kill them.”

Full details of the study will be presented in the near future when the study manuscript publishes.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough the guys from the TV show mentioned in the article think this Ketchum is full of shit, evidently not the expert in DNA that she claims to be and her lab and its methods leave much to be desired.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
89,114
Location
Centreback
I wonder if she posts on the David Icke forum? If not she should. Human hybrid my arse.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,654
Supports
Everton
Penna said:
I spent a couple of days on Easter Island once. The scenery is like Devon in many respects, except for the Spanish-speaking and the statues (and the heat, of course).

A strange and mystical place. The most interesting bit is the quarry, with all these half-finished statues just sticking out of the rock. Why were they left like that?
Click to expand...
One of my lecturers has been working there for the past year or so and she gave us a lecture about it and told us why. I can't remember though. I'm sure the link was sent to us so ill try to find it.
 

SteveJ

all-round nice guy, aka Uncle Joe Kardashian
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
62,851
I wondered where Andy Carroll had gone.
 

SteveJ

all-round nice guy, aka Uncle Joe Kardashian
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
62,851
NASA has revealed that the Columbia crew were not told that the shuttle had been damaged and they might not survive re-entry.

The seven astronauts who died will be remembered at a public memorial service on the 10th anniversary of the disaster this Friday at Florida's Kennedy Space Center.

The shuttle was headed home from a 16-day science mission when it broke apart over Texas on February 1, 2003, because of damage to its left wing.
Ten years ago, experts at NASA's mission control faced the terrible decision over whether to let the astronauts know that they may die on re-entry or face orbiting in space until the oxygen ran out:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...entry.html?ICO=most_read_module#axzz2JfzNQyYl
 

SteveJ

all-round nice guy, aka Uncle Joe Kardashian
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
62,851
Richard III dig: DNA confirms bones are king's



A skeleton found beneath a Leicester car park has been confirmed as that of English king Richard III.

Experts from the University of Leicester said DNA from the bones matched that of descendants of the monarch's family.

Lead archaeologist Richard Buckley, from the University of Leicester, told a press conference to applause: "Beyond reasonable doubt it's Richard."

Richard, killed in battle in 1485, will be reinterred in Leicester Cathedral.

Mr Buckley said the bones had been subjected to "rigorous academic study" and had been carbon dated to a period from 1455-1540.

Dr Jo Appleby, an osteo-archaeologist from the university's School of Archaeology and Ancient History, revealed the bones were of a man in his late 20s or early 30s. Richard was 32 when he died.

His skeleton had suffered 10 injuries, including eight to the skull. Two of the skull wounds were potentially fatal.

The spine was badly curved, a condition known as scoliosis, but there was no trace of a withered arm, as some Tudor historians had claimed Richard had.

Dr Appleby said: "The analysis of the skeleton proved that it was an adult male but was an unusually slender, almost feminine, build for a man.

"Taken as a whole the skeletal evidence provides a highly convincing case for identification as Richard III."

Dr Turi King, project geneticist, said there had been concern DNA in the bones would be too degraded: "The question was could we get a sample of DNA to work with, and I am extremely pleased to tell you that we could."

She added: "There is a DNA match between the maternal DNA of the descendants of the family of Richard III and the skeletal remains we found at the Greyfriars dig.

"In short, the DNA evidence points to these being the remains of Richard III."

Richard was a royal prince until the death of his brother Edward IV in 1483. Appointed as protector of his nephew, Edward V, Richard instead assumed the reins of power.

Challenged by Henry Tudor, Richard was killed at Bosworth in 1485 after only two years on the throne.

He was given a low-key burial beneath in the church of Greyfriars in the centre of Leicester.

But when this building was demolished in the 16th Century the exact location became uncertain and was eventually forgotten.

Despite this, a team of enthusiasts and historians traced the likely area - and, crucially, also found a 17th-generation descendant of Richard's sister with whose DNA they could compare any remains recovered.

In August 2012, an excavation began in a city council car park - the only open space remaining in the likely area - which quickly identified buildings connected to the church.

The bones were found in the first days of the dig.

Details of the reburial ceremony have yet to be released.

(BBC)
 

Penna

Kind Moderator (with a bit of a mean streak)
Staff
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
49,689
Location
Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est.
The Richard III story is fantastic. I think he should be buried in York Minster, as the folk of Leicester weren't too kind to him. I didn't realise before I read this story, but I believe it is archeological convention to bury excavated human bones in the nearest consecrated ground. However, these are the bones of a King, and he should get a fitting burial, IMO.

Looks like it's likely to be Leicester Cathedral though - which I think is wrong, although it'll boost tourism a bit in Leicester.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.