Re: butchering sites at the intersection of river channels (Re: AAT is based on comparative data (Re: Algis ranting about AAH


"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> doesn't seem to understand
what large bodeis of water are in message
news:431BE515.9DBF230C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > "Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1125289380.258720.49740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > "Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > news:1125164764.129473.214120@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > Robin Dennell 2003
> > > "Dispersal & colonisation, long & short chronologies: how continuous
is
> > the
> > > Early Pleist.record for hominids outside E.Africa?"
> > > JHE 45:421-440
> > >
> > > >>> > >>>>>>Do you really believe that Homo got to Java over your
> > savanna??
> > > :-D
> > >
> > > >>> > >>>>> That's what Dennell said.
> > >
> > > >>> > >>>> Yes, those biases... They can people make tell
everything...
> > >
> > > >>> > >>> Biases like: "1.8-Ma Homo remains come from Algeria, Iran,
> > Kenya,
> > > Georgia, Java... always near lakes or seas (R.Dennell 2003 JHE
> > 45:421);..."
> > >
> > > >>> The reason there are no quotation marks (from Dennell) in Marc's
> > > statement is because nowhere in that paper did Dennell make such a
claim.
> > > Dennell, instead, does use the terms "permanent water" and "open
water"
> > > throughout the paper (pp. 423, 426, 428 etc.). This is quite
different
> > than
> > > saying near lakes and seas.
> > >
> > > >> So, Lee, what is the exact difference between 'lakes and seas' and
> > > permanent and open water"?
> > >
> > > > So, Rich, just what exactly does your question have to do with the
fact
> > > that Marc got caught misrepresenting what Dennell actually said? A
little
> > > smoke screen perhaps?
> > >
> > > "got caught"?? No nonsense please: it's clear from Dennell that early
> > > hominids lived near permanent & open waters.
> >
> > No nonsense please. You just changed the wording from ALWAYS NEAR LAKES
> > OR SEAS (R.Dennell 2003 JHE 45:421);... to "hominids lived near
> > permanent & open waters" which is what *I* cited, not you. Try to be
> > consistent [I'll skip your lecture 2B about honesty here :-)] in your
> > arguments please. Every one on this planet is *near* a sea if you make
> > the scale generalized enough. Science is not about generalizations, its
> > about specifics arrived at by data, and lots of it, not to mention
> > repeatability and independent verification; none of which are contained
> > in your arguments.
> >
> > OK, rephrase: Dennell's paper shows that there's not 1 instance of early
> > Homo that is clearly away from lakes or seas. This can be expected
(though
> > not necessary) on comparative grounds. If somebody doubts it, he has to
> > give good reasons. The more we know, the more likely it becomes that
all
> > early Homo sites were near large bodies of water, that the lakes in the
Rift
> > were larger when Homo was around etc. If you believe AAT is wrong, you
have
> > to show that our ancestors wer not "shoreline" (as Cunnane calls it).
> >
> > BTW, have you read RW Dennell
> > > cs.1988 "Early tool-making in Asia: 2-Ma artefacts in Pakistan"
Antiquity
> > > 62: 98-106? eg,
> >
> > Nice bluff Marc, but the Pakistani sites he is referring to are ca.500
> > km from the Indian Ocean.
> >
> > 1) today yes, but 2 Ma?? evidence?
> > 2) no large bodies of water there IYO?
> > 3) no bluff, just read it - with *open* mind
>
> 2 ma - consider (from http://dana.ucc.nau.edu/~evc/index5.htm ) :
>
> http://dana.ucc.nau.edu/~evc/Pleistocene.jpg
>
> By the middle late miocene, the continents were pretty much in their
> final positions, with little major change. You're not going to get 500 km
> out of that.
>
> > ...


.

Relevant Pages