Text 24279, 115 rader
Skriven 2009-05-21 22:39:00 av Glen Jamieson
     Kommentar till en text av Carol Shenkenberger
Ärende: WILD SHEEP  90521
=========================
 -=> Quoting Carol Shenkenberger to Glen Jamieson <=-

    
 > You are catching up.  This was only about 5 weeks old.  (g)
 CS> Well I caught up just before starting the new job then fell back.

That's understandable.  Is the new job like what you expected?
 
 > According to the movies the indigenous Americans readily took to using
 > horses for warfare and general transport.

 CS> Thats exactly what did happen.  "like ducks to water' as we might say
 CS> here. It seemed a natural but missing element.

Maybe there was something from way back in their genes.
 
 >  CS> Actually the American continents (north and south) never had
 >  CS> 'proto-humans'. There is some debate on just when men came here but
 >  CS> most top out at earliest of 15,000 years even on the most radical
 >  CS> 13,000 seems generally accepted.  Well into the 'homo sapiens sapiens'
 > 
 > That sounds logical.

 CS> Proto-humand are generally defined as before Neanderthals.  One

That is what I was wondering.  I do know that in Europe, at least,
there was quite an overlap of the Neanderthals with the Homo Sapiens.

 CS> radical site claims USA inhabitance when they still seem to have
 CS> existed but they do it by carbon dating some clovis era tools to some
 CS> charchol.  It is in a washed out river bed.  There's no real telling if
 CS> the tools were of the same era of if someone just found a bed of old
 CS> 'coal' and used it later. 
 CS> The rest date from 10,000 to a possible 14,000 (with one reputable but
 CS> slim evidence of 15,000).  Neaderthals apparently left this life at
 CS> 30,000 ago. 
 CS> For something like (they arent sure really) 20,000 years we appear to
 CS> have been in tandem with neaderthals.  50,000 to 30,000 ago.
 
 >  CS> Yes, we have 'new world monkeys' here native.  Mostly seen in lower
 >  CS> mexico through south america.  Ours have prehensile tails (old world
 >  CS> ones dont).
 > Something I didn't know!  Whenever I see a monkey I will have to see
 > how he uses his tail, so I know where he comes from.  :)

 CS> Hehehe I got that off wikipedia.  It isnt that old world ones dont
 CS> have them (tails) or use them but it seems a differnce level?  

There are lots of monkeys in Indonesia, but I admit I didn't study
their tail uses.  Mainly they try to frisk tourists, looking for bananas.

 >  CS> Geologically, OZ separated well before the Americas from 'Pangea' but
 >  CS> we seem to be pretty much next after it when you get to larger land
 >  CS> masses.  Unlike OZ, we've had a sporadic land channel for a very long
 >  CS> time though so it's not as obvious.  Mammals won here for example.
 >  CS> South American before it joined wi
 >  CS> th North America was noted for marsupials, most of which subsumed to
 >  CS> mammals over time but we have some of the remaining ones that arent of
 >  CS> OZ origin.  (Possum pie anyone?).
 > 
 > The later mammals were more intelligent and more aggressive than most
 > marsupials, and so took over from them, except in Australia and New
 > Guinea.  The possums are much better survivors than the other
 > marsupials, and so have remained in America.  Their introduction to
 > New Zealand has resulted in them taking over from the native wildlife

 CS> True all of it.  South American 'history' geologically is a case in
 CS> point of what may have occured to OZ areas if it conjoined with a land
 CS> mass.  Thats pretty much what happened.  SA was separate for a long
 CS> time then the connection came back and it's species were decimated by
 CS> mammals. 
 >  CS> How did Man get here?  It's still under debate but logistically it may
 >  CS> well have come from 3 places with a possible 4th.  Bering Straits and
 >  CS> the snow-line arctic Inuit, sea going polynesians (same group as OZ),
 >  CS> and Europe across Greenland-Iceland route to Canada.  During some
 CS> times
 >  CS> that route from Europe would have been fairly small hops.
 >  CS> Some evidence leads well to Bering straights and man moving down from
 >  CS> there and other evidence seems to indicate dual settlement of
 >  CS> polynesian in south america, and Asian/European in North which met and
 >  CS> blended in middle america roughly.

The Polynesians were wonderful seamen, so it is quite possible for
them to have settled in South America long before they came to New
Zealand and killed off the people who were there first.  There are
indications that the Australian aborigines originally came from India,
arriving some 80,000 years ago.  As your distinguished aircraft
engineer, Burt Rutan, pointed out, Australians were the cleverest
aeronautical engineers in the world at one time, inventing the high
lift aerofoil some 12,000 years before the Wright brothers.  Their
returning boomerangs flew far better than anyone else's.  (G)

 > Perhaps one of these days we will know all the whens and wheres of
 > migrations around the world.  In the meantime, there is plenty to keep
 > anthropologists busy speculating and investigating.
 CS> An interest of mine is to read on such.

Mine too.
 
 >  CS> The only thing certain here in the Americas, is they came in waves.
 > That seems to have been the pattern in other countries as well, with
 > the migrations driven by wars, famines, climate changes or government
 > policy (such as the Spanish Catholic Kings - Ferdinand and Isabela -
 > and Hitler driving out the Jews).  And as you know, that Isabela was
 > the one who backed young Colon in his mad idea of finding a short cut
 > to the East Indies, and look what that led to - you!

 CS> True! It's a facinating place to check out.  2 legged mammal migration
 CS> at the core.

Those 2 legged mammals make a wonderful subject for study.  (G)
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR]

--- FLAME v2.0/b
 * Origin: Braintap BBS Adelaide Australia (3:800/449)