User Panel
Posted: 10/3/2022 2:18:32 PM EDT
ARCHAEOLOGISTS HAVE UNEARTHED 600,000-YEAR-OLD EVIDENCE OF BRITAIN’S EARLY INHABITANTS NEAR CANTERBURY, ENGLAND. The discovery, led by the Department of Archaeology at the University of Cambridge has found evidence of early humans that date from between 560,000 and 620,000 years ago during the Palaeolithic Period. The site was first identified in the 1920’s when labourers found handaxes in an ancient riverbed, which researchers have now applied modern dating techniques through radiometric dating, infrared-radiofluorescence (IR-RF) dating and controlled excavations of the site. In a study, published in the journal Royal Society Open Science, the researchers have confirmed the presence of Homo heidelbergensis, an extinct species or subspecies of archaic human which existed during the Middle Pleistocene and an ancestor of Neanderthals. Homo heidelbergensis is thought to have descended from the African Homo erectus during the first early expansions of hominins out of Africa beginning roughly 2 million years ago. Early humans are known to have been present in Britain from as early as 840,000, and potentially 950,000 years ago, but these early visits were fleeting due to cold glacial climatic changes driving populations out of northern Europe which colonised Britain during a warming phase between 560,000 and 620,000 ago. During this period, Britain was connected to Europe on the north-western peninsular of the European continent, allowing populations to migrate to new hunting grounds probably during the warmer summer months. As well as dating the site, the researchers have discovered new flint artefacts, including early ‘scrapers’, which infrared-radiofluorescence (IR-RF) dating was able to determine the point at which they were buried by studying when feldspar sand-grains were last exposed to sunlight. Dr Tobias Lauer from the University of Tübingen in Germany said: “The artefacts are precisely where the ancient river placed them, meaning we can say with confidence that they were made before the river moved to a different area of the valley.” Homo heidelbergensis was a hunter gatherer that ate a diverse range of animal and plant foods. Many of the tools discovered may have been used to process animal carcasses, potentially deer, horse, rhino and bison; as well as tubers and other plants. Evidence of this can be seen in the sharp-edged flake and handaxe tools present at the site. The presence of scraping and piercing implements, however, suggest other activities may have been undertaken. “The diversity of tools is fantastic. In the 1920s, the site produced some of earliest handaxes ever discovered in Britain. Now, for the first time, we have found rare evidence of scraping and piercing implements at this very early age”, said Dr Alastair Key from the University of Cambridge. Dr Tomos Proffitt from the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology, who analysed the artefacts, said: “Scrapers, during the Palaeolithic, are often associated with animal hide preparation. Finding these artefacts may therefore suggest that people during this time were preparing animal hides, possibly for clothing or shelters”. The range of stone tools, not only from the original finds, but also from our new smaller excavations suggest that hominins living in what was to become Britain, were thriving and not just surviving. https://www.heritagedaily.com/2022/06/600000-year-old-evidence-of-britains-early-inhabitants/143920 |
|
Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven?
|
|
|
Some of those do look like they were worked. Others look like ordinary sex stones.
|
|
Quoted: Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven? View Quote (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. |
|
Quoted: Like the earth was created on October the 23rd 4004 BC? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven? Like the earth was created on October the 23rd 4004 BC? And that water didn't percolate from it's core and flood the globe. |
|
I love seeing old shit like this because I find it interesting, however if I was just fucking around in the countryside and stumbled across one I would just think it was a rock. I don’t know how people can tell the difference between just a busted up stone and some thing that was handcrafted aside from symmetry like in the case of an arrowhead or something but a lot of that old shit just looks like….. a rock to me. Probably why I am not an archaeologist.
|
|
Quoted: (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. View Quote [Sarcasm] You must have missed the memo about science now being an institution that isn't to be questioned. [/Sarcasm] |
|
Quoted: I love seeing old shit like this because I find it interesting, however if I was just fucking around in the countryside and stumbled across one I would just think it was a rock. I don’t know how people can tell the difference between just a busted up stone and some thing that was handcrafted aside from symmetry like in the case of an arrowhead or something but a lot of that old shit just looks like….. a rock to me. Probably why I am not an archaeologist. View Quote You don't have to be one, stone tools are still very much useful today in a survival situation and worth learning how to make one. Some of those cutters are even sharper than any metal blade. How to Make Stone Tools in a Survival Situation | Basic Instincts | WIRED |
|
Quoted: You don't have to be one, stone tools are still very much useful today in a survival situation and worth learning how to make one. Some of those cutters are even sharper than any metal blade. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBuUSPCpbXU View Quote I was going to say, hand axes are pretty easy to recognize. I wouldn't want to build a theory on one rock but when you find a bunch of them that have been worked on both sides into a recognizable tool you can infer humans were involved. |
|
Here's a question. Are archaeology grants similar to climate change grants? If the Cambridge archaeologists didn't publish "new" findings, would they continue to receive grants? I think not.
|
|
|
Quoted: (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. View Quote lol - it would seem the poster you are addressing has an appropriate sig line... |
|
|
|
Did they build a chunnel from France and ride a train across?
|
|
|
|
Quoted: (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven? (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. Well stated. |
|
|
I fail to see what leads them to believe those are indeed tools and not just rocks
|
|
|
Quoted: Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven? View Quote Read up on the new debate that the James Webb is disproving the big bag. I've come to the conclusion that there are many, many things outside our realm of understanding. No matter how much you try to explain differential equations to a dog, they will never understand it. I believe a similar phenomenon exists for us with regards to time/space. It's just outside of what we are capable of understanding. |
|
|
|
|
Quoted: (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven? (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. So the moon isn’t made of cheese? |
|
Hoax. Someone made an axe head out of 500,000 year stone and buried it there.
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven? (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. So the moon isn’t made of cheese? It's too early to tell. |
|
In on this thread but only because I laugh anytime someone says, or writes, homo erectus.
|
|
Quoted: (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. View Quote That sounds like some bullshit a professor would say. |
|
Quoted: At that time, they weren't the British Isles. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Did they build a chunnel from France and ride a train across? At that time, they weren't the British Isles. I think it's been the British isles and British peninsula many times, back and forth. Was the earth in an ice age or between them at ~598k BC? |
|
|
These researchers are dumb.
"How They Survived: There is evidence that H. heidelbergensis was capable of controlling fire by building hearths, or early fireplaces, by 790,000 years ago in the form of fire-altered tools and burnt wood at the site of Gesher Benot Ya-aqov in Israel. Why did they come together at these early hearths? Perhaps to socialize, to find comfort and warmth, to share food and information, and to find safety from predators." No you dumb motherfuckers, they came together because of PUSSY! Why did the chicks want to hang out with OGG? OGG had fire! Chicks want to stay warm, OGG had fire, ergo, OGG gets to fuck the chicks that want to stay warm beside his fire. Why did the chicks want to hang out with OGG? OGG had food! Chicks dig food! OGG was a great hunter. OGG had food, chicks want foo, OGG gets to fuck chicks. Why did the chicks want to hang out with OGG? OGG was a mighty hunter and could kick the shit outta the man bun wearing soy-boy cave dwellers in their prehistoric Crocs. Chicks want a real man. |
|
|
|
Quoted: Did they build a chunnel from France and ride a train across? View Quote Great Britain has only been an island for a relatively short time in human history. Doggerland: Europe's Missing Country |
|
|
|
|
Quoted: Yeah, if they'd have used fresh stone they'd have been caught right off the bat. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Hoax. Someone made an axe head out of 500,000 year stone and buried it there. Yeah, if they'd have used fresh stone they'd have been caught right off the bat. |
|
Quoted: (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. View Quote History currently has no mention of the Hyborian Age and the Picts, except for some of Howard's archaeological writings on Conan. |
|
|
Quoted: (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Does anyone else notice everything we were taught in school is being disproven? (a) Were you taught a lot about early human habitation in Britain while you were in school? (b) What has been "disproven" here exactly? It was already known that humans have been in Britain for almost a million years. This 600,000 year old find doesn't disprove anything. (c) This is literally how science is supposed to work. We develop the best theory we can at the time - based on available evidence. Then, as new evidence is discovered, we update, improve and change our theories to better incorporate new evidence. Oh, I don’t know. Columbus discovered America. Dinosaurs were lizards I could go on but I recently discovered American colloquialism was replaced with snark. I know it’s currently the ‘in thing’ to catch the arrow and sling it back. That becomes a spectacle when no arrows were ever fired. Ooops, more Hillbillyisms. My penned thought wasn’t directed at the education system or scientists. It’s just a matter of irony. A fact of life. Nothing offensive and not an untrue statement. A small scribble on the web. I could go on but in all sincerity if we don’t understand the premise, it would just be fodder for the kewl kids. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.