Date   

Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

 

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 12:02 PM, alandarwinvanarsdale wrote:
The paleoenvironment at Trachilos is well understand. It was a lagoon beach bar
These fine grained flat-lying sediments look nothing like lagoon or beach bar sediments. Maybe you can give us a reference to a proper geological description of these or other nearby Miocene sedimentary rocks, that claims they were subaerial? (A proper description will include thin sections and other sedimentary structures besides the supposed footprints.)
 
--
AquaticApe.net


Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

alandarwinvanarsdale
 

In many types of dating you can follow the beds to adjacent places that have been dated. This is what they did, and what they mean by an adjacent basin. Of course ichnofossils including tracks are found in diverse types of sedimentary rocks, and hominins tracks are known from beach deposits such as the oldest known human fossils (tracks) from England. “Calcareous nannoplankton data from sediments exposed near Trachilos and belonging to the same sub-basin indicate deposition during calcareous nannofossil biozone CN9bB, between 6.023 and 6.727 Ma._______________________________________________________________________________From the Nature article “Calcareous nannoplankton data from sediments exposed near Trachilos and belonging to the same sub-basin indicate deposition during calcareous nannofossil biozone CN9bB, between 6.023 and 6.727 Ma.”

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

From: Gareth Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 3:36 AM
To: AAT@groups.io
Subject: Re: [AAT] Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

 

From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of Allan Krill <krill@...>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 11:51 AM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

 

This dating study establishes the age of the rocks at Trachilos Beach to be Miocene. They mention that the rocks are shallow marine. They also report that there are no beach deposits at Trachilos Beach until sometime in the Pleistocene. If they had mentioned that mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology, their paper would not have been accepted in Nature. 

--

AquaticApe.net

 


Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

alandarwinvanarsdale
 

The paleoenvironment at Trachilos is well understand. It was a lagoon beach bar, and not subaqueous when the prints were made. As I recall they were dated by forams above and below the tracks stratigraphically.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

From: Gareth Morgan
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 2:08 AM
To: AAT@groups.io
Subject: Re: [AAT] Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

 

Trachilos sediments have been dated by marine foramenifera, therefore they could not have been marine sediments.

 

Just meaningless noise now from the stalker.

From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of Allan Krill <krill@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 10:46 AM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

 

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 02:09 AM, fceska_gr wrote:

'mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology...'

I'm not sure that is strictly true, and I'm sure there are plenty more examples.

Your footprint examples are in river sediments and wind-blown sediments, not marine sediments. 

Mammal footprints typically occur with desiccation mudcracks and raindrop marks, and none of these can occur in marine sediments like those at Trachilos, which have been dated by marine foraminifera and nannoplankton. If the marine water is so shallow that a mammal can walk in it, the sediments are typically disturbed by tides, waves, and bioturbation. The flat and smooth Trachilos sediments were probably deposited below wave base, and were later disturbed by dewatering.

Paleoanthropologists typically make claims that are beyond belief, and no one (except maybe creationists) complains. It is like in religion, where respected leaders tell their followers to accept belief in miracles, and those who don't believe are either too polite or too intimidated to challenge those claims. 

--
AquaticApe.net

 


Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

Gareth Morgan
 

Trachilos sediments have been dated by marine foramenifera, therefore they could not have been marine sediments.

Just meaningless noise now from the stalker.


From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of Allan Krill <krill@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 10:46 AM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma
 
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 02:09 AM, fceska_gr wrote:

'mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology...'

I'm not sure that is strictly true, and I'm sure there are plenty more examples.

Your footprint examples are in river sediments and wind-blown sediments, not marine sediments. 

Mammal footprints typically occur with desiccation mudcracks and raindrop marks, and none of these can occur in marine sediments like those at Trachilos, which have been dated by marine foraminifera and nannoplankton. If the marine water is so shallow that a mammal can walk in it, the sediments are typically disturbed by tides, waves, and bioturbation. The flat and smooth Trachilos sediments were probably deposited below wave base, and were later disturbed by dewatering.

Paleoanthropologists typically make claims that are beyond belief, and no one (except maybe creationists) complains. It is like in religion, where respected leaders tell their followers to accept belief in miracles, and those who don't believe are either too polite or too intimidated to challenge those claims. 

--
AquaticApe.net


Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

 

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 02:09 AM, fceska_gr wrote:

'mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology...'

I'm not sure that is strictly true, and I'm sure there are plenty more examples.

Your footprint examples are in river sediments and wind-blown sediments, not marine sediments. 

Mammal footprints typically occur with desiccation mudcracks and raindrop marks, and none of these can occur in marine sediments like those at Trachilos, which have been dated by marine foraminifera and nannoplankton. If the marine water is so shallow that a mammal can walk in it, the sediments are typically disturbed by tides, waves, and bioturbation. The flat and smooth Trachilos sediments were probably deposited below wave base, and were later disturbed by dewatering.

Paleoanthropologists typically make claims that are beyond belief, and no one (except maybe creationists) complains. It is like in religion, where respected leaders tell their followers to accept belief in miracles, and those who don't believe are either too polite or too intimidated to challenge those claims. 

--
AquaticApe.net


Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

Gareth Morgan
 


From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of Allan Krill <krill@...>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 11:51 AM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma
 
This dating study establishes the age of the rocks at Trachilos Beach to be Miocene. They mention that the rocks are shallow marine. They also report that there are no beach deposits at Trachilos Beach until sometime in the Pleistocene. If they had mentioned that mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology, their paper would not have been accepted in Nature. 

--

AquaticApe.net


Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

fceska_gr
 

'mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology...'

I'm not sure that is strictly true, and I'm sure there are plenty more examples.

Documentation of mammal footprints from the Sivas Basin:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337102936_Primary_report_of_first_documentation_of_mammal_footprints_from_the_late_Oligocene_in_the_Sivas_Basin_Turkey

Neanderthal footprints found in Gibraltar:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190213100452.htm

F.

On 12/10/2021 11:51 π.μ., Allan Krill wrote:
This dating study establishes the age of the rocks at Trachilos Beach to be Miocene. They mention that the rocks are shallow marine. They also report that there are no beach deposits at Trachilos Beach until sometime in the Pleistocene. If they had mentioned that mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology, their paper would not have been accepted in Nature. 

--

AquaticApe.net


Re: Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

 

This dating study establishes the age of the rocks at Trachilos Beach to be Miocene. They mention that the rocks are shallow marine. They also report that there are no beach deposits at Trachilos Beach until sometime in the Pleistocene. If they had mentioned that mammal footprints in shallow marine sedimentary rocks are otherwise unknown in paleontology, their paper would not have been accepted in Nature. 

--

AquaticApe.net


Trachilos footprints ~6 Ma

Marc Verhaegen
 

Age constraints for the Trachilos footprints from Crete.

We present an updated time frame for the 30-m thick late-Miocene sedimentary Trachilos section from Crete, that contains the potentially oldest hominin footprints.

The section is characterized by normal magnetic polarity.

New & published foraminifera bio-stratigraphy results suggest an age of the section within the Mediterranean bio-zone MMi13d, younger than ~6.4 Ma.
Calcareous nanno-plankton data from sediments exposed near Trachilos, and belonging to the same sub-basin indicate deposition during calcareous nannofossil biozone CN9bB, between 6.023 & 6.727 Ma.

By integrating the magneto- & bio-stratigraphic data, we correlate the Trachilos section with normal polarity Chron C3An.1n, between 6.272 & 6.023 Ma.

Using cyclo-stratigraphic data based on magnetic susceptibility, we constrain the Trachilos footprints age at ~6.05 Ma, roughly 0.35 Ma older than previously thought.

Some uncertainty remains related to an inaccessible interval of ~8 m section & the possibility that the normal polarity might represent the slightly older Chron C3An.2n.

Sediment accumulation rate & bio-stratigraphic arguments, however, stand against these points, and favor a deposition during Chron C3An.1n.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-98618-0


Sea otter's pocket

Marc Verhaegen
 

Thanks, DD, I knew sea-otters dive with a stone in the axilla, but I didn't know this seems to be a real pocket.




https://youtu.be/UrZsCSYGQ-k

Hand axe might fit, but hazardous to skin.



Epi-paleolithic line+hook fishing

Marc Verhaegen
 

Early line and hook fishing at the Epipaleolithic site of Jordan River Dureijat (Northern Israel)
Antonella Pedergnana cs 2021 PLoS doi org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257710

19 broken & complete bone fish-hooks & 6 grooved stones from the Epi-paleolithic site of Jordan River Dureijat (Hula Valley, Israel) represent the largest collection of Epi-paleolithic & Paleolithic fishing technology.
Jordan River Dureijat was occupied throughout the Epipaleolithic (~20–10 ka), but the fish-hooks appear only at the later stage, 15–12 ka.
This paper presents a multi-dimensional study of the hooks, grooved stones, site context & the fish assemblage from macro & micro perspectives following technological, use wear, residue & zoo-archaeological approaches.
The study of the fish-hooks
-reveals significant variability in hook size, shape & feature type,
-provides the first evidence that several landmark innovations in fishing technology were already in use at this early date:
inner & outer barbs, a variety of line attachment techniques incl. knobs, grooves & adhesives & some of the earliest evidence for artificial lures.
- Wear on the grooved stones is consistent with their use as sinkers.
- Plant fibers recovered from the grooves of 1 hook shank & 1 stone suggest the use of fishing line.
This + associations between the grooved stones & hooks in the same archaeological layers suggests the emergence of a sophisticated line & hook technology.
The complexity of this technology is highlighted by the multiple steps required to manufacture each component and combine them into an integrated system.
The appearance of such technology in the Levantine Epipaleolithic record reflects a deep knowledge of fish behavior & ecology.
This coincides with significant larger-scale patterns in subsistence evolution: broad spectrum foraging (an important first signal of the beginning of the transition to agriculture in this region).





</section>


Re: sheepshead fish have humanlike incisors

alandarwinvanarsdale
 

Humans incisors have multiple functions. Two of which are grasping and scraping. Before we ate meat our incisors still scraped such as removing plant material from harder cores or surfaces, and scraping fruit from large seeds. Sheepshead fish use their teeth for scraping. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________A basic chisel like design for front teeth comes up often and is one of the dental morphological traits likely to be convergent. “Human like” “incisors” are not just seen in primates and fish, other mammals have them as well. Rodents have two on the top and two on the bottom, which grow through their lives. The first mammals had incisors and chisel like incisors are largely plesiomorphic for mammals.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

From: Marc Verhaegen
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 7:11 AM
To: AAT@groups.io
Subject: [AAT] sheepshead fish have humanlike incisors

 

Why do sheepshead fish have humanlike incisors?

 


Re: evolution of sloths on hot & dry coasts?

alandarwinvanarsdale
 

In the Western USA deserts ground sloths often held a desert (xeric) niche eating Joshua trees when other forage was not abundant. Joshua trees are very slow growing. The niche is not filled with the extinction of ground sloths. Tree eating herbivores have a strong tendency to grow larger over time (and thus thicker bones to support the weight), including in xeric environments. _________________________________________________________________________________________________Tree eating animal evolution can largely be seen in terms of linear evolution for larger body size. With extinction events followed by other often related populations entering the emptied niche and in turn growing larger over time. This is one of the rare cases since the Carboniferous when linear evolution is a good model. _________________________________________________________________________________________________In the last 2.1 million years and especially starting at about 600kya it is likely linear evolution is a good model for human evolution. Before 2.1mya linear evolution as in general is a poor model for human evolution and is one of the causes of a lot of incorrect thinking in paleoanthropology. Of course I am not the only messenger about linear evolution usually being a poor model, this is widely known in modern biology and more and more paleoanthropology (Fuentes etc.) are lecturing against the evils of linear evolution models and “missing links”.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

From: fceska_gr via groups.io
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 7:12 AM
To: AAT@groups.io
Subject: Re: [AAT] evolution of sloths on hot & dry coasts?

 

from 4.45 minutes in...

8 Ma, late Miocene, Peruvian coasts
Hot dry desert and coasts
Thalassocnus
got denser bones
increased size

They can see it in other animals, but they can't see it in Homo...

F.

On 11/10/2021 1:58 μ.μ., Marc Verhaegen wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt9tBtQoAHo

--
Francesca Mansfield Odyssey Sailing Tel: 0030 24280 94128 Mobile/WhatsAp: +30 6974 659 156 f-ceska@...

 


Re: evolution of sloths on hot & dry coasts?

fceska_gr
 

from 4.45 minutes in...

8 Ma, late Miocene, Peruvian coasts
Hot dry desert and coasts
Thalassocnus
got denser bones
increased size

They can see it in other animals, but they can't see it in Homo...

F.

On 11/10/2021 1:58 μ.μ., Marc Verhaegen wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt9tBtQoAHo
--
Francesca Mansfield Odyssey Sailing Tel: 0030 24280 94128 Mobile/WhatsAp: +30 6974 659 156 f-ceska@...


sheepshead fish have humanlike incisors

Marc Verhaegen
 

Why do sheepshead fish have humanlike incisors?


evolution of sloths on hot & dry coasts?

Marc Verhaegen
 


Re: On ancestry

 

On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 04:41 AM, Gareth Morgan wrote:
Maybe you should start with this one for primary school children.
 
https://kids.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frym.2019.00022
Thanks Gareth, This is a useful page for children and adults. The Figure 1 (Evolutionary scheme) does not agree with the sentence:
Ten to twelve million years ago, primates divided into two branches, one included species leading to modern (current) humans and the other branch to the great apes that include gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, and orangutans.
I think the Evolutionary scheme of Figure 1 is more correct than that sentence. 

And the silly cartoon (with a skull lying above a ditch) is not really part of the article. It is a standard cartoon for this series: "Frontiers for Young Minds"
--
AquaticApe.net


Re: On ancestry

Gareth Morgan
 

Maybe you should start with this one for primary school children.
https://kids.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frym.2019.00022
Most of what we know about the origin of humans comes from the research of paleoanthropologists, scientists who study human fossils. Paleoanthropologists identify the sites where fossils can be found. They determine the age of fossils and describe the features of the bones and teeth discovered. Recently, paleoanthropologists have added genetic technology to test their hypotheses.
kids.frontiersin.org




From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of Allan Krill <krill@...>
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2021 2:24 PM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] On ancestry
 
On Sat, Oct 9, 2021 at 12:40 PM, alandarwinvanarsdale wrote:
Garbage in garbage out is what computer programmers like to say
If you have a collection of books in a foreign language that you can’t read, it  might as well be garbage. But if you give it to the right person, it can be very valuable. The page Far Forbears by Boed Marres is amazing, and should not be considered garbage. 
 
--
AquaticApe.net


Re: On ancestry

 
Edited

On Sat, Oct 9, 2021 at 12:40 PM, alandarwinvanarsdale wrote:
Garbage in garbage out is what computer programmers like to say
If you have a collection of books in a foreign language that you can’t read, it  might as well be garbage. But if you give it to the right person, it can be very valuable. The page Far Forebears by Boed Marres is amazing, and should not be considered garbage. 
 
--
AquaticApe.net


Re: On ancestry

Gareth Morgan
 

often 15 even 20 percent as to what regions their ancestry is from.

Genetics is in its infancy -- about as predictive as phrenology in its heyday.

G.


From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of alandarwinvanarsdale <alandarwinvanarsdale@...>
Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 10:45 PM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] On ancestry
 

Identical triplets vary a lot, often 15 even 20 percent as to what regions their ancestry is from.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

From: Gareth Morgan
Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 3:16 AM
To: AAT@groups.io
Subject: Re: [AAT] On ancestry

 

How often is DNA evidence wrong?



Last year, the bureau admitted that it had reviewed testimony by its microscopic-hair-comparison analysts and found errors in at least 90 percent of the cases.

 

 

 

In ancestry DNA testing, different companies give different results. Even the same company gives different results at different times for the same person. They fail to tell the difference between male and female. There is zero consensus. Here's just one example: - https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reasonable-doubt/480747/

 

Anyone treating DNA evidence as the 100% accurate gospel truth about things that happened millions of years ago are just deluding themselves.

From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of Allan Krill <krill@...>
Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 11:22 AM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] On ancestry

 

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 08:29 PM, alandarwinvanarsdale wrote:

Human geneticists learned about Out of Africa and made their data fit the Recent Out of Africa hypothesis by elevating the hypothesis to axiomatic status.

Reading DNA code of living animals is not like interpreting Australopithecus or Homo erectus. Paleoanthropologists never find a complete skeleton that was respectfully buried and preserved, and never find a fire-pit with the charred bones of animals that had been roasted and eaten. Geneticists are not making this stuff up about Out of Africa. DNA is like reading a book, where the text is actually legible. Anyone able to read, reads the same thing. In paleoanthropology, they have to guess all the time, based on the meager fossil evidence and the models in their heads. Their work can also be compared to reading a book, but they only have a few scraps of text to work with, and they won't let you test whether their text scraps are authentic.
 
--
AquaticApe.net

 

1141 - 1160 of 73797