Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Footprints of 'first Americans'

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    San Marcos, CA

    Footprints of 'first Americans'

    E-mail this to a friend Printable version Footprints of 'first Americans'

    By Paul Rincon
    BBC News science reporter

    People left traces of their presence in the sediments of a shoreline

    Human settlers made it to the Americas 30,000 years earlier than previously thought, according to new evidence.

    A team of scientists came to this controversial conclusion by dating human footprints preserved by volcanic ash in an abandoned quarry in Mexico.

    They say the first Americans may have arrived by sea, rather than by foot.

    The currently accepted theory is that the continent's early inhabitants arrived 12,500 years ago, by crossing a land bridge between Siberia and Alaska.

    Details of the latest findings were unveiled at the UK Royal Society's Summer Science Exhibition.

    Ancient lake

    Scientist Silvia Gonzalez of Liverpool's John Moores University and her colleagues found the footprints in the quarry, some 130km (80 miles) south-east of Mexico City, in 2003. But they have only finished dating them this year.

    It's going to be an archaeological bomb and we're up for a fight

    Dr Silvia Gonzalez

    "The footprints were preserved as trace fossils in volcanic ash along what was the shoreline of an ancient volcanic lake," Dr Gonzalez said.

    Their footprints were soon covered in more ash and lake sediments and, when water levels rose, became as solid as concrete.

    Dr Gonzalez was under no illusions that the finding would be controversial: "It's going to be an archaeological bomb," she told the BBC News website, "and we're up for a fight."

    The team used several methods to date a variety of material from the site near Puebla, Mexico, in order to be sure they were right about the age.

    It would be significant if it were demonstrated, but usually those (early) sites don't hold up well

    Dr Michael Faught

    "We have materials that have been dated below the footprint layer, the footprint layer itself and on top of the footprint layer. Everything is making sense," said Dr Gonzalez.

    The researchers used radiocarbon dating on shells and animal bones in the sequences and dated mammoth teeth by a technique called electron spin resonance. The sediments themselves were dated by optically stimulated luminescence.

    "Some lake sediments were incorporated into the ash and were baked. They look like small fragments of brick and these were the ones we dated in the footprint layer. They gave us a result of 38,000 years," Dr Gonzalez.

    Land crossing

    Under the traditional view of how the Americas were settled, humans trekked from Siberia to Alaska across a land bridge that linked these land masses at the end of the last ice age (between 10,000 and 12,500 years ago).

    Central to this theory, called the Clovis First model, are Clovis points - the tools these settlers used to hunt large beasts, or megafauna, such as mammoths and mastodonts.

    "The existence of 40,000-year-old human footprints in Mexico means that the Clovis First model of human occupation can no longer be accepted as the first evidence of human presence in the Americas," said co-investigator David Huddart, of Liverpool John Moores.

    Dr Michael Faught, an expert in early American archaeology, said the findings sounded interesting: "It would be significant if it were demonstrated, but usually those (early) sites don't hold up well," he told the BBC News website.

    But, he added: "There's more and more evidence that Alaska was not the only place people came into the continent."

    Dr Gonzalez is a proponent of the Coastal Migration Theory. This proposes that people arrived in boats, hugging the coastline from North to South.

    But where these settlers came from is still a mystery, she says. Some have proposed that the earliest humans to reach the continent could have come from south-east Asia or even Australia.

    Genetic studies of present-day Native American populations support a recent arrival from north-east Asia, which agrees well with an entry through the Beringian land bridge at the end of the last Ice Age. Dr Gonzalez suggests that the earliest settlers may have become extinct and therefore left no genetic legacy in modern populations. She thinks these hunters may have been highly mobile, living in small groups, perhaps explaining why they left scant trace of their presence. Dr Gonzalez and ancient DNA expert Alan Cooper, of the University of Adelaide in Australia, have managed to extract genetic material from three molars belonging to Peņon Woman III, a 13,000-year-old partial skeleton from Mexico. The work and analysis is still underway.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Olathe, KS

    Re: Footprints of 'first Americans'

    The cool thing about science is that it's ever-changing. You constantly learn new things, and it keeps you on your toes.
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  4. #3
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Washington, DC

    Re: Footprints of 'first Americans'

    Quote Originally Posted by RedBloodedAmerican
    But, he added: "There's more and more evidence that Alaska was not the only place people came into the continent."

    Dr Gonzalez is a proponent of the Coastal Migration Theory. This proposes that people arrived in boats, hugging the coastline from North to South.
    I've often wondered why more people aren't proponents of this theory. I suppose because there is less evidence to record it, but when I was growing up the crossing of the ice bridge was taught as the only way that people arrived in N. America...I've often wondered why they couldn't also have taken boats.

Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball

Contact us: Boss | GIK | cumberlandreds | Gallen5862 | JaxRed | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | RedsfaninMT | The Operator