|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
 Posted - 06/14/2007 : 18:54:16
|
An article in this month's Scientific American discussed the reintroduction of large animals into North America that had died out about 13,000 years ago; animals such as elephants, lions, and wild horses. Interesting idea, that thing that bothered me is that the Pleistocene Overkill theory is stated as being widely accepted. That is the theory that man crossed the land bridge to North America and basically hunted the big game animals to extinction, or at least had a significant role in the extinction.
I have a big problem with this theory. There is no doubt that there was an ecological catastrophe, but I do not think it is possible that man had even a minor hand in it. My skepticism is basically along 3 lines of thought:
1. There were not enough people in the Americas to wipe out that many animals in a period of 1000 years or so. There have been very few discoveries of artifacts from that time frame. Any discovery such as Meadowcroft Rock Shelter in Pennsylvania is headline news. Folsum points, which were used by the paleo-indians 8,000 – 10,000 years ago, are very rare, though widely dispersed. The older Clovis points are even rarer though again widely dispersed across North America. The point being that there certainly was not a large population of people in North America.
2. When the ecological collapse occurred in North America there was a simultaneous collapse in Europe and Asia. The thought that introducing man into the Americas upset the ecological balance cannot be the same reason that the Mega fauna died out in Europe and Asia where man had lived in conjunction with the these animals for a 100,000 years.
3. Stone Age people do not typically hunt very large dangerous animals for food. The Elephant, Rhinoceros and Hippo were never threatened in Africa from 10,000 – 500 years ago even though there was a very large population of people. Why hunt an animal that dangerous when there were plenty of smaller less dangerous animals to hunt?
I just wondered what anyone thought about this or if there is some insight that I am missing. This has always seemed just a little hard for me to swallow.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2007 : 20:02:29 [Permalink]
|
Fascinating subject!
I tend to support the Pleistocene Overkill theory. What I think happened is that a culture of mammoth-hunters developed in Eurasia, along with the technology (Folsom-quality tips on spears), and the social organization and hunting techniques that were required. I think there may have been spiritual and cultural beliefs that contributed to targeting the mammoth and other megafauna in particular. (Imagine, for instance, that a young male might not have been allowed to have a mate until he was in on a mammoth kill, or that a woman may been required to have a mammoth-tusk threshold for her hut before she could marry.) Such a cultural emphasis, giving higher status to individuals who hunted these megafauna, might explain the apparent ineconomy of concentrating so much effort upon them.
It might not require a large population, merely a few hundred determined bands hunting one herd, then another, to extinction. Food was probably not the main, or the entire reason, for hunting mammoth. In northern Eurasia, whole human settlements have been excavated with huts made from mammoth tusk and bone. I imagine this culture spreading across Beringia as they followed herds into the New World. (The earlier arrivals in America probably did not have the combination of technology and hunting technique that was required to go after these megafauna.) A few hundred years of such mammoth-madness could do the trick.
What strikes me, as with so many extinct species (such as the giant moa of New Zeeland), is that the spread of humanity, or humans with a new technology, closely matches the extinctions. I think the overkill theory is the default school of thought, which would need to be toppled by further evidence. So far, I haven't seen a good argument for an alternative.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 06/14/2007 20:04:39 |
 |
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
 Posted - 06/14/2007 : 21:20:07 [Permalink]
|
HalfMooner said:
In northern Eurasia, whole human settlements have been excavated with huts made from mammoth tusk and bone. |
Thats true, but did they use bones they found because it was the best available building material? Maybe, maybe not.
There have been thouands of pounds of mamoth ivory that has come out of the artic and little or none of it seems to have been from slaughtered animals. I do not think that the mamoth was a tundra animal. It was an animal that lived in the lower latitudes in conjunction with the glacier terminus. There were probably incredibly lush grass lands and steppe around the glacier. Cold fronts sweeping off of the glacier in summer would ensure that there were no trees near the terminus. The animals probabley migrated south for the winter.
When the glaciers retreated the mamoth followed them north. The northern latitudes have little rainfall very short growing seasons and of course severe winters. There is no way the mamoths could migrate down to the lower latitudes in the winter, way to far. They were pretty much doomed when the glacier retreated.
I wonder what killed off the horses, camels, the 3 or 4 other species of bison, the sloths, etc. Was it due to a couple of vital species dying off, like mamoths. Or was it due to other environmental factors?
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 06/14/2007 : 21:32:42 [Permalink]
|
Flood?
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 06/15/2007 : 02:14:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Flood?
|
What flood? Please elaborate.
Some of the Clovis and Folsom points were quite large and wide. And knapped to a razor's edge. These were mammoth-killers, and the probable way it was done went thus: A group of mammoths was stalked until the target animal was in just the right position. Then one or more hunters would ease up behind it and cast darts mounted with these points directly up the mammoth's wazoo, where the skin is thinner and the tissues are softer, and it's less likely to hit bone going in, then run for it. After that, it was just a matter of keeping track of the injured mammoth until it collapsed from internal bleeding and/or peridonitis. To get more power into the cast, an atlatl was probably used.
As late as the early '50s there were bushmen in Africa who hunted large game including elephants in much the same way. They used points, usually bone but later of steel, coated with a toxin. There is no reason to not consider that the paleoindians might have done the same.
Edit: Agree with fursur, I don't think that the North American populatuion was dense enough to wipe out the megefauna. There was something else at work.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 06/15/2007 02:23:14 |
|
|
|
Ghost_Skeptic
SFN Regular
Canada
510 Posts |
Posted - 06/15/2007 : 02:24:35 [Permalink]
|
The effect of humans on the large animals may have been indirect. There was a similar extinction of mega fauna in Austrailian after the arrival of humans. One hypothesis is that the practice of setting fires to drive animals out of cover changed the ecology to the detriment of many species. Here is an MP3 format audio file about the Marsupial Lion that discusses this.
In North America the Indians did hunt one large dangerous animal (the Buffalo or Bison). One common technique was to drive them over a cliff, which resulted in killing many more Bison than could be consumed.
However, there was also considerable climate change occuring at the same time. |
"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. / You can send a kid to college but you can't make him think." - B.B. King
History is made by stupid people - The Arrogant Worms
"The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism." - William Osler
"Religion is the natural home of the psychopath" - Pat Condell
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" - Thomas Jefferson |
| Edited by - Ghost_Skeptic on 06/15/2007 02:50:45 |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 06/15/2007 : 06:35:36 [Permalink]
|
I guess it is possible that there was a population of mamoth hunters that lived in eurasia and migrated to the New world and were responsible for the death of the mega-fauna. Are clovis points and folsum points only found in North America or are they also found in Eurasia? To busy to check on that right now.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 06/15/2007 : 07:36:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by furshur
I guess it is possible that there was a population of mamoth hunters that lived in eurasia and migrated to the New world and were responsible for the death of the mega-fauna. Are clovis points and folsum points only found in North America or are they also found in Eurasia? To busy to check on that right now.
|
Wiki says of the of Clovis points: | There are two different opinions about how the Clovis point first came to be. The first is that there were Pre-Clovis people in the New World whose roots were made in the Middle Paleolithic and Clovis traditions in which were developed from them. The other opinion is that the first inhabitants in the New World were the Clovis from the Upper Paleolithic who reverted back to the flake technology. Both of these opinions mean that the Clovis point was developed in the New World, but the pre-Clovis opinion requires that a very early entry into the New World was formed, the Clovis opinion does not show this. At this time, there have been no Clovis points found in the Old World or in Alaska. However, the Solutrean hypothesis suggests that Clovis Culture developed from the similar Solutrean of southwestern Europe, and that the technology may have been brought to America through migration along the Atlantic pack ice edge using survival skills similar to that of modern Inuit people. |
And of the later Folsom points: | Folsom points are found widely across North America and are dated to the period between 9500 BC and 8000 BC. The discovery of these artifacts in the early 20th century raised questions about when the first humans arrived in North America. The prevailing idea of a time depth of about 3,000 years was clearly mistaken. In 1932, an even earlier style of projectile point was found, Clovis, dating back to 13,500 years ago. Clovis points have been found in situ in association with mammoth skeletons. |
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 06/15/2007 : 07:42:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by furshur
I guess it is possible that there was a population of mamoth hunters that lived in eurasia and migrated to the New world and were responsible for the death of the mega-fauna. Are clovis points and folsum points only found in North America or are they also found in Eurasia? To busy to check on that right now.
|
Now you've opened a can of vermiformes!
Much of the current thought now is that the peoples who became Clovis migrated from south to north. If that is the case, the unique, Clovis point is a relativly recent development. It is further thought that the peoples who migrated from Siberia are the ancestors of the Inuit and the Eskimos.
The Clovis point itself shows a people who were so successful that they could get artistic in making their basic tools. The beautiful fluting on both sides of the point, while indeed improving the design of point, was not necessary. These folks had time to not only figure it out, but make it pretty in the process.
There can be little doubt that mammoth hunters were active in Eurasia. It's a matter of economics: get the most meat for the effort expended. Better to kill one big one than scuffle all over killing several smaller ones. And these ancient peoples were anything but stupid. They would have found a method to kill these huge animals pretty efficently and in relative safety (I suspect that mammoth hunting was a young man's perogitive and the best of them got more nookie than they could handle).
As to the question, paleoindian migrations routes and dates are still pretty iffy, so damned if I know. The link mentions a single point, but that could be an anomoly.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 06/15/2007 : 13:50:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
The Clovis point itself shows a people who were so successful that they could get artistic in making their basic tools. The beautiful fluting on both sides of the point, while indeed improving the design of point, was not necessary. These folks had time to not only figure it out, but make it pretty in the process.
|
I think that there is another thing to consider:
My Dad is a 91-year-old, still-active carpenter. He is absolutely fanatically obsessive about the care and storage of his tools. My sister thinks this behavior is a bit bizarre, but I differ. He simply wants perfect tools to give his work that extra edge.
Great White Shark.
Spitfire.
Mammoth hunting must have extremely hazardous, Having absolutely perfect points (and probably perfect atlatls or spear-shafts, too) had to have been a matter of overwhelming concern, often a life-and-death matter. As in many things evolved by nature or designed by humans for a purpose (think Great White Shark or Spitfire), spear heads that are most perfect for use are also most perfect esthetically.
Folsom Point.
Were I an old man, an experienced knapper and former hunter, with a plenitude of flint cores, time, and smoked mammoth meat available, I might be interested in making the very most efficient points possible for my son to use in the next hunt. (I might recall, with a lingering ache to remind me, a hunt years before when I was lucky to survive with a broken leg, when a mammoth turned on me after a sloppily made point failed to penetrate its hide.)
Cultures would doubtless notice the tendency for that which is most efficient to be most pleasing to the eye. Beauty and utility thus would converge, both in the product and in the minds of their makers.
Esthetically pleasing in good times, and ready to give the best possible function in times of hunger, beautiful flint points must have been the greatest portable physical asset possessed by the paleoindian hunting bands. Think of their value also as money: One perfect point could buy the knapper several great flint cores.
I see the convergence of form and function as being a "natural" development. The best-working points just looked good, and the best-looking ones worked best.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 06/15/2007 13:52:22 |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 02:12:48 [Permalink]
|
| A tip of my hat (or goggles) to you for finding a legitimate reason for posting a picture of a Supermarine Spitfire, quite aside from being an effective weapon of war, what a lovely flying machine it is too. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 06/20/2007 : 03:57:09 [Permalink]
|
The interesting thing about the Clovis point is that the flutes were done by knapping out a single flake.
Looking around, I found this: Texas Site Suggests Link with European Upper Paleolithic
by Don Alan Hall & George Wisner
A Texas archaeologist is looking toward Europe to possibly explain the origins of a vast amount of Clovis-age artifacts being recovered from a site in central Texas--a site that may hold new insights into the peopling of the Americas.
So far, the Gault site has produced Clovis style projectile points, point preforms, blades and cores, burins, and small engraved stones. These artifacts bear a "striking similarity" to cultural material recovered from Upper Paleolithic sites in Western Europe, says Michael B. Collins, a research associate with the Texas Archaeological Research Laboratory at the University of Texas in Austin. A sampling of Gault site artifacts was displayed in Santa Fe during the Clovis and Beyond Conference, garnering considerable interest from conference-goers.
|
All Stone Age tool kits were basically the same, that is, contained pretty much the same sorts of tools. The differences were in the number of tools and the degree of craftmanship. A carefully wrought tool of any sort shows that it's maker was not living hand-to-mouth. If he was, his tool would be, not sloppy -- can't afford sloppy -- but a little rough. Good enough to get the job done, but little more.
I used to collect arrowheads when I was a kid. I'd go out to a freshly plowed field after a spring rain and almost always find a few. I haven't done it for many years, but back around 10 years ago, while hunting for a copperhead to present to a class, I came across a fairly rare point. It was small, quite thick, roughly knapped, and fashioned from white quartz. This tells me that the guy needed a point right now! and had no flint or obsidian handy.
The most beautiful point I ever found, and it ended up in a small museum -- thanks Mom! -- was knapped from a large garnet. Somebody had too much time on his hands...
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 06:42:41 [Permalink]
|
| Couldn't it be possible that they got their mammoths by Persistence-hunting? |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 06/20/2007 : 06:56:30 [Permalink]
|
I dunno, I get my mammoth from Omaha Steaks. I suggest a brine marinade and then searing the meat before grilling, to keep the mosture in.
Mammoth hunting must have extremely hazardous, Having absolutely perfect points (and probably perfect atlatls or spear-shafts, too) had to have been a matter of overwhelming concern, often a life-and-death matter. As in many things evolved by nature or designed by humans for a purpose (think Great White Shark or Spitfire), spear heads that are most perfect for use are also most perfect esthetically. |
I for one prefer the P-38 and the Stingray(the animal) as far as esthetics are concerned...
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 06/20/2007 06:57:39 |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 07:14:35 [Permalink]
|
| Couldn't it be possible that they got their mammoths by Persistence-hunting? |
I recall watching incredible documentary about a group of Bushman using persistence hunting techniques on a giraffe when I was in high school in the 70s. The used these tiny bows with poison arrows. The poison was not nearly strong enough to bring the giraffe until he had been hit about 5 - 10 times over the course of several days.
| I used to collect arrowheads when I was a kid. I'd go out to a freshly plowed field after a spring rain and almost always find a few. |
Some of my most treasured memories of my father are of us slogging through muddy corn fields looking for arrowheads. It is funny that a memory like that brings back so many emotions. We are funny animals I guess.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/22/2007 : 08:14:17 [Permalink]
|
| My stance is in between Furshur and Mooner. There had been many waves of megafauna in North America getting thinned out and then making a serious comeback in conjunction with glacial events. It seems to me that what happened was that the megafauna were on the run and getting thinned out once again from the natural cycle of climate change, and this was happening at the same time that humans were invading. I think it is unlikely that human hunting played no role in finishing the megafauna off given all the coincidences. And climate changes were global, so that explains why animals in Europe were also dying off. The reason why it was more devastating in the Americas is exactly because those animals had not been living side by side humans for 100,000 years. No way of coping with human hunting had evolved, so they were easier targets. However, had the climate not already been thinning the megafauna out considerably, I doubt sparse bands of human hunters could have done the whole job themselves. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Pleistocene Overkill
