• Re: Bone tools from 1.5 MYA

    From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Thu Mar 6 19:59:35 2025
    On 6.3.2025. 17:40, erik simpson wrote:
    Systematic bone tool production at 1.5 million years ago

    Ignacio de la Torre, Luc Doyon, Alfonso Benito-Calvo, Rafael Mora,
    Ipyana Mwakyoma, Jackson K. Njau, Renata F. Peters, Angeliki
    Theodoropoulou & Francesco d’Errico

    Abstract
    Recent evidence indicates that the emergence of stone tool technology occurred before the appearance of the genus Homo1 and may potentially be traced back deep into the primate evolutionary line2. Conversely,
    osseous technologies are apparently exclusive of later hominins from approximately 2 million years ago (Ma)3,4, whereas the earliest
    systematic production of bone tools is currently restricted to European Acheulean sites 400–250 thousand years ago5,6. Here we document an assemblage of bone tools shaped by knapping found within a single stratigraphic horizon at Olduvai Gorge dated to 1.5 Ma. Large mammal
    limb bone fragments, mostly from hippopotamus and elephant, were shaped
    to produce various tools, including massive elongated implements. Before
    our discovery, bone artefact production in pre-Middle Stone Age African contexts was widely considered as episodic, expedient and
    unrepresentative of early Homo toolkits. However, our results
    demonstrate that at the transition between the Oldowan and the early Acheulean, East African hominins developed an original cultural
    innovation that entailed a transfer and adaptation of knapping skills
    from stone to bone. By producing technologically and morphologically standardized bone tools, early Acheulean toolmakers unravelled
    technological repertoires that were previously thought to have appeared routinely more than 1 million years later.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08652-5. Open access

    So, did those who were persuading us into thinking that this was
    episodic, apologize? Or should we encounter misconceptions like this
    over and over again, just because this is "science", and science doesn't
    think.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Primum Sapienti@21:1/5 to Mario Petrinovic on Sat Mar 8 22:49:46 2025
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:
    On 6.3.2025. 17:40, erik simpson wrote:
    Systematic bone tool production at 1.5 million years ago

    Ignacio de la Torre, Luc Doyon, Alfonso Benito-Calvo, Rafael Mora,
    Ipyana Mwakyoma, Jackson K. Njau, Renata F. Peters, Angeliki
    Theodoropoulou & Francesco d’Errico

    Abstract
    Recent evidence indicates that the emergence of stone tool technology
    occurred before the appearance of the genus Homo1 and may potentially
    be traced back deep into the primate evolutionary line2. Conversely,
    osseous technologies are apparently exclusive of later hominins from
    approximately 2 million years ago (Ma)3,4, whereas the earliest
    systematic production of bone tools is currently restricted to
    European Acheulean sites 400–250 thousand years ago5,6. Here we
    document an assemblage of bone tools shaped by knapping found within a
    single stratigraphic horizon at Olduvai Gorge dated to 1.5 Ma. Large
    mammal limb bone fragments, mostly from hippopotamus and elephant,
    were shaped to produce various tools, including massive elongated
    implements. Before our discovery, bone artefact production in
    pre-Middle Stone Age African contexts was widely considered as
    episodic, expedient and unrepresentative of early Homo toolkits.
    However, our results demonstrate that at the transition between the
    Oldowan and the early Acheulean, East African hominins developed an
    original cultural innovation that entailed a transfer and adaptation
    of knapping skills from stone to bone. By producing technologically
    and morphologically standardized bone tools, early Acheulean
    toolmakers unravelled technological repertoires that were previously
    thought to have appeared routinely more than 1 million years later.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08652-5. Open access

            So, did those who were persuading us into thinking that this was episodic, apologize? Or should we encounter misconceptions like this
    over and over again, just because this is "science", and science doesn't think.

    The conclusion that this used to be considered episodic
    was based on the previous body of evidence. But as the
    authors above state

    "Before our discovery, bone artefact production
    in pre-Middle Stone Age African contexts was
    widely considered as episodic, expedient and
    unrepresentative of early Homo toolkits."

    New finds, paradigms change

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Primum Sapienti@21:1/5 to erik simpson on Sat Mar 8 22:46:36 2025
    erik simpson wrote:
    Systematic bone tool production at 1.5 million years ago



    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08652-5. Open access

    Thanks for finding this!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mario Petrinovic@21:1/5 to Primum Sapienti on Sun Mar 9 11:03:14 2025
    On 9.3.2025. 6:49, Primum Sapienti wrote:
    Mario Petrinovic wrote:
    On 6.3.2025. 17:40, erik simpson wrote:
    Systematic bone tool production at 1.5 million years ago

    Ignacio de la Torre, Luc Doyon, Alfonso Benito-Calvo, Rafael Mora,
    Ipyana Mwakyoma, Jackson K. Njau, Renata F. Peters, Angeliki
    Theodoropoulou & Francesco d’Errico

    Abstract
    Recent evidence indicates that the emergence of stone tool technology
    occurred before the appearance of the genus Homo1 and may potentially
    be traced back deep into the primate evolutionary line2. Conversely,
    osseous technologies are apparently exclusive of later hominins from
    approximately 2 million years ago (Ma)3,4, whereas the earliest
    systematic production of bone tools is currently restricted to
    European Acheulean sites 400–250 thousand years ago5,6. Here we
    document an assemblage of bone tools shaped by knapping found within
    a single stratigraphic horizon at Olduvai Gorge dated to 1.5 Ma.
    Large mammal limb bone fragments, mostly from hippopotamus and
    elephant, were shaped to produce various tools, including massive
    elongated implements. Before our discovery, bone artefact production
    in pre-Middle Stone Age African contexts was widely considered as
    episodic, expedient and unrepresentative of early Homo toolkits.
    However, our results demonstrate that at the transition between the
    Oldowan and the early Acheulean, East African hominins developed an
    original cultural innovation that entailed a transfer and adaptation
    of knapping skills from stone to bone. By producing technologically
    and morphologically standardized bone tools, early Acheulean
    toolmakers unravelled technological repertoires that were previously
    thought to have appeared routinely more than 1 million years later.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08652-5. Open access

             So, did those who were persuading us into thinking that this
    was episodic, apologize? Or should we encounter misconceptions like
    this over and over again, just because this is "science", and science
    doesn't think.

    The conclusion that this used to be considered episodic
    was based on the previous body of evidence. But as the
    authors above state

    "Before our discovery, bone artefact production
    in pre-Middle Stone Age African contexts was
    widely considered as episodic, expedient and
    unrepresentative of early Homo toolkits."

    New finds, paradigms change

    This isn't the only evidence that we have about past, we have a lot of
    evidence. The problem is in the wrong interpretation of evidence, which
    is obvious. The interpretation of our raised forehead was that this gave
    us intelligence. The interpretation of humans and animals was that
    humans are intelligent, and animals aren't. A mountain of wrong interpretations, over and over again. There is no excuse for wrong interpretation, being so wrong is stupid there is no way around it. How
    come I had the right interpretation?
    See, they willingly choose to neglect some evidence. For example, they
    find 1.5 million old peach endocarp in China, which is identical to
    today's peach endocarp. Every plant changes when domesticated. This
    evidence says that people domesticated peaches at least 1.5 mya. They
    find ungulate tracks going parallel to lake margin 1.5 my old. The only interpretation can be that those ungulates were herd by humans. But
    scientists neglect this crucial evidence without blinking an eye just
    like that, and continue to support the idea that large brain gives you intelligence, despite the fact that they found intelligent human species
    with small brains. This all is a sea of stupidity. Wrong interpretation
    after wrong interpretation, massive negligence of crucial evidence.
    Recently a paper came out, which talks about human footprints. They do
    mention Laetoli footprints, they do mention 1.5 old human footprints
    (Koobi Fora), but not a single word about the most important of them
    all, the Trachilos footprints. And there is always some excuse for this. Somebody is messing big time with this science, this foul behavior has
    to be addressed, instead we constantly have excuses for such behavior.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)