From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo


https://www.timesofisrael.com/earliest-worship-evidence-of-35000-year-old-prehistoric-rites-found-in-northern-israel/

Evidence for spirituality, "Religious" beliefs goes back maybe
400,000 years. Mungo Man is older than is described here, and
his prepared burial certainly suggests spiritual beliefs, as
do all prepared burials.

This isn't proof of but certainly evidence for...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruniquel_Cave

So what gives?
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 12.12.2024. 16:26, JTEM wrote:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/earliest-worship-evidence-of-35000-year- old-prehistoric-rites-found-in-northern-israel/

Evidence for spirituality, "Religious" beliefs goes back maybe
400,000 years. Mungo Man is older than is described here, and
his prepared burial certainly suggests spiritual beliefs, as
do all prepared burials.

This isn't proof of but certainly evidence for...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruniquel_Cave

So what gives?

"Bulgars" aren't Slavs, "Bulgars are Turkic tribe, which conquered
some Slav tribes (seven of them). Those Turks, just like a lot of other conquers which come from non-agricultural societies (lets say, Turks,
Vikings) adopt language, culture and religion of conquered people. Why? Because they don't care much about their identity, their culture, their religion. Agricultural people care a lot about religion, their culture
and identity. So, strong religion goes along with agricultural,
hierarchical societies.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 13.12.2024. 0:09, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

On 12.12.2024. 16:26, JTEM wrote:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/earliest-worship-evidence-of-35000-year-
old-prehistoric-rites-found-in-northern-israel/

Evidence for spirituality, "Religious" beliefs goes back maybe
400,000 years. Mungo Man is older than is described here, and
his prepared burial certainly suggests spiritual beliefs, as
do all prepared burials.

This isn't proof of but certainly evidence for...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruniquel_Cave

So what gives?

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a "Bulgars" aren't Slavs, "Bulgars are Turkic tribe, which conquered some Slav tribes (seven of them). Those Turks, just like a lot
of other conquers which come from non-agricultural societies (lets say, Turks, Vikings) adopt language, culture and religion of conquered
people. Why? Because they don't care much about their identity, their culture, their religion. Agricultural people care a lot about religion, their culture and identity. So, strong religion goes along with agricultural, hierarchical societies.

We have blade technology 500 kya. This means, sickle. This means
cereals. This means agriculture. This means strong religion.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 13.12.2024. 0:22, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

On 13.12.2024. 0:09, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

On 12.12.2024. 16:26, JTEM wrote:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/earliest-worship-evidence-of-35000-
year- old-prehistoric-rites-found-in-northern-israel/

Evidence for spirituality, "Religious" beliefs goes back maybe
400,000 years. Mungo Man is older than is described here, and
his prepared burial certainly suggests spiritual beliefs, as
do all prepared burials.

This isn't proof of but certainly evidence for...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruniquel_Cave

So what gives?

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a "Bulgars" aren't Slavs, "Bulgars are Turkic tribe, which >> conquered some Slav tribes (seven of them). Those Turks, just like a
lot of other conquers which come from non-agricultural societies (lets
say, Turks, Vikings) adopt language, culture and religion of conquered
people. Why? Because they don't care much about their identity, their
culture, their religion. Agricultural people care a lot about
religion, their culture and identity. So, strong religion goes along
with agricultural, hierarchical societies.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a We have blade technology 500 kya. This means, sickle. This means cereals. This means agriculture. This means strong religion.

This means bigger societies. This means division of labor, ie. craftsmen appeared. So, some people were doing one job, some other
people were doing some other job. The grinding of hematite was one of
those jobs, so we have centralized grinding of hematite at one place,
hence the evidence of red ochre usage.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 12/12/24 6:09 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

So, strong religion goes along with

agricultural, hierarchical societies.

Well. Certainly "Strong" in the archaeological sense.

There's a permanency in agricultural societies. You
live where your father lived, where his father lived
before him, and so on and so on.

'Tis one of the reason why I never doubted that the
famous gobekli tepe structures were tied to the
(abundant) wild grains that populated the region. It
would have been a reason for them to return, year
after year, a reason for them to construct structures
for storage (or even just guarding stored grains)
and of course they would protect it all & ensure
continued abundance by honoring the spirits (gods).

Nothing I came up with on my own, just an idea that
I immediately picked up on...
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a We have blade technology 500 kya.

We had throwing spears 400,000 years ago. Blades
go back millions of years, if you want to get
technical.

This means, sickle.

That's a non sequitur.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 12/12/24 6:29 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a This means bigger societies. This means division of labor, ie.
craftsmen appeared.

Um... yes.

Exploiting the forest supports a higher population
density than does the savanna, exploiting the sea
supports a higher population density than does
hunting-gathering in the forest, agriculture
supports a higher population density than does the
exploitation of the sea.

This doesn't mean a primate fell out of tree and
began immediately growing their own grains...

Although proto agriculture, technically, has no
upward limit on age -- it's leaps & bounds beyond
gathering -- we're not exactly bristling with
evidence for it much before agriculture itself.

I suspect that it's not a very large step from
proto agriculture to agriculture.

I've heard of people, modern people, people living
right now who exploit natural plants often leaving
every third of however many, ensuring there will be
more next year. THAT would qualify as proto
agriculture, would it not?

The next step would be, what? Picking all the plants
you DON'T want, leaving the fields clear for the
plants you do want? Might that be even less complicated
than amassing seeds, figuring out when & how to plant
them?
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 13.12.2024. 6:45, JTEM wrote:

-aMario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a We have blade technology 500 kya.

We had throwing spears 400,000 years ago. Blades
go back millions of years, if you want to get
technical.

The last that I heard is that blades started to occur 500 kya, and
they became common 300 kya, if I recall correctly.

This means, sickle.

That's a non sequitur.

It looks like you are confusing something. Not every sharp edge is a
blade. Blade tool is only a sickle, there is no other blade tool. Blades
have sense only as a sickle.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

On 13.12.2024. 6:45, JTEM wrote:

-a-aMario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a We have blade technology 500 kya.

We had throwing spears 400,000 years ago. Blades
go back millions of years, if you want to get
technical.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a The last that I heard is that blades started to occur 500 kya,
and they became common 300 kya, if I recall correctly.

It's kind of funny how a chimp banging something with a rock
is "a tool" but early Homo (or even pre homo) BREAKING rocks
to produce sharp flakes for cutting isn't a "Blade."

They were sharp and used for cutting!

Put another way: How far back do CUT MARKS go?

Cut marks == blade

No?

I say yes, and your blades go back 3 million years plus, but
some evidence.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a It looks like you are confusing something. Not every sharp edge
is a blade. Blade tool is only a sickle, there is no other blade tool. Blades have sense only as a sickle.

A "Blade" is a "Tool" with a sharp edge used for cutting.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 14.12.2024. 5:34, JTEM wrote:

-aMario Petrinovic wrote:

On 13.12.2024. 6:45, JTEM wrote:

-a-aMario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a We have blade technology 500 kya.

We had throwing spears 400,000 years ago. Blades
go back millions of years, if you want to get
technical.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a The last that I heard is that blades started to occur 500 >> kya, and they became common 300 kya, if I recall correctly.

It's kind of funny how a chimp banging something with a rock
is "a tool" but early Homo (or even pre homo) BREAKING rocks
to produce sharp flakes for cutting isn't a "Blade."

They were sharp and used for cutting!

Put another way:-a How far back do CUT MARKS go?

Cut marks == blade

No?

I say yes, and your blades go back 3 million years plus, but
some evidence.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a It looks like you are confusing something. Not every sharp >> edge is a blade. Blade tool is only a sickle, there is no other blade
tool. Blades have sense only as a sickle.

A "Blade" is a "Tool" with a sharp edge used for cutting.

A knife is sickle, a and a sickle is knife. No, it isn't.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 12/14/24 9:01 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

A "Blade" is a "Tool" with a sharp edge used for cutting.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a A knife is sickle, a and a sickle is knife. No, it isn't.

A knife is a blade, a sickle is a blade or blades.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 15.12.2024. 11:17, JTEM wrote:

On 12/14/24 9:01 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

A "Blade" is a "Tool" with a sharp edge used for cutting.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a A knife is sickle, a and a sickle is knife. No, it isn't.

A knife is a blade, a sickle is a blade or blades.

So, who cares. The important is, what those "blades" are doing. And it
is obvious that those blades that emerged in the times that I mentioned,
are working as sickles, because there is no reason to manufacture those
things for some other reason. With your short "blades" that you are mentioning, you can cut only one stem at the time. This isn't efficient.
You have to cut a bunch of cereal stems in one movement, and for this
you need to have long blades.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

On 15.12.2024. 11:17, JTEM wrote:

A knife is a blade, a sickle is a blade or blades.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a So, who cares.

You do. It's very important to you for some reason. You said
that blades go back half a million years, I pointed out that
technically they go back millions and here you are *Still*
arguing that a blade isn't a blade! Clearly you care a lot.

The important is, what those "blades" are doing.
And it is obvious that those blades that emerged in the times that I mentioned, are working as sickles, because there is no reason to
manufacture those things for some other reason.

Cutting meat off the bone.

Cutting an animal hide.

With your short "blades"
that you are mentioning, you can cut only one stem at the time.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Several-kinds-of-sickles-used-in-the-class-experiment-based-on-the-evolution-of-sickle_fig1_284001270

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chris-Clarkson-2/publication/284001270/figure/fig1/AS:440877240852482@1482124733657/Several-kinds-of-sickles-used-in-the-class-experiment-based-on-the-evolution-of-sickle.png

Apparently you're wrong.

You can even use these little shards as deadly weapons:

https://mexicanroutes.com/macuahuitl/
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 15.12.2024. 19:38, JTEM wrote:

-aMario Petrinovic wrote:

On 15.12.2024. 11:17, JTEM wrote:

A knife is a blade, a sickle is a blade or blades.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a So, who cares.

You do. It's very important to you for some reason. You said
that blades go back half a million years, I pointed out that
technically they go back millions and here you are *Still*
arguing that a blade isn't a blade!-a Clearly you care a lot.

The important is, what those "blades" are doing. And it is obvious
that those blades that emerged in the times that I mentioned, are
working as sickles, because there is no reason to manufacture those
things for some other reason.

Cutting meat off the bone.

Cutting an animal hide.

With your short "blades" that you are mentioning, you can cut only one
stem at the time.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Several-kinds-of-sickles-used-in- the-class-experiment-based-on-the-evolution-of-sickle_fig1_284001270

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chris-Clarkson-2/ publication/284001270/figure/fig1/AS:440877240852482@1482124733657/ Several-kinds-of-sickles-used-in-the-class-experiment-based-on-the- evolution-of-sickle.png

Apparently you're wrong.

You can even use these little shards as deadly weapons:

https://mexicanroutes.com/macuahuitl/

These are "microblades", which emerged only recently. But, this is all
the same for you, of course.
To cut hide you have to have solid sharp edge, not brittle long edge.
You cannot use brittle stone in food preparation, because stone sherds
will be left in food, so no meat cutting.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 12/16/24 6:28 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a These are "microblades", which emerged only recently.

They're millions of years old. Millions.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a To cut hide you have to have solid sharp edge,

Flint is sharper than steel, obsidian is sharper than flint.

They can cut an animal hide.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 17.12.2024. 2:37, JTEM wrote:

On 12/16/24 6:28 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a These are "microblades", which emerged only recently.

They're millions of years old. Millions.

Gee, you really don't get anything. Why you are in this group at all,
if you don't even try to know something? What is "millions of years old"?
BTW, those sickles resemble blades, instead of having multiple micro-blades, you can have one long blade. For those micro-blades to fit
into this handle, you got to have a glue. So those sickles were possible
only after you figure out how to make good glue, before that you only
had the option of using a blade tool.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a To cut hide you have to have solid sharp edge,

Flint is sharper than steel, obsidian is sharper than flint.

They can cut an animal hide.

Yes, exactly. So why would you need to make a blade? *Blade is long
and narrow*. A toll is categorized as "blade" if it is twice as long as
it is wide. So, blades are fragile, and they don't withstand strong forces.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

On 17.12.2024. 2:37, JTEM wrote:

On 12/16/24 6:28 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a These are "microblades", which emerged only recently.

They're millions of years old. Millions.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a Gee, you really don't get anything.

You're saying this because I pointed out that blades are known
to have been in use for millions of years..

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a BTW, those sickles resemble blades

They're made up of a number of blades identical to those in use
for millions of years. That's all. They just took a number of
blades of a type produced for millions of years and set them
in wood to create a sickle.

instead of having multiple
micro-blades, you can have one long blade.

That is infinitely more difficult, working with flint or
obsidian, than is using multiple blades (or a type produced
for millions of years).
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 18.12.2024. 6:19, JTEM wrote:

-aMario Petrinovic wrote:

On 17.12.2024. 2:37, JTEM wrote:

On 12/16/24 6:28 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a These are "microblades", which emerged only recently.

They're millions of years old. Millions.

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a Gee, you really don't get anything.

You're saying this because I pointed out that blades are known
to have been in use for millions of years..

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a BTW, those sickles resemble blades

They're made up of a number of blades identical to those in use
for millions of years. That's all. They just took a number of
blades of a type produced for millions of years and set them
in wood to create a sickle.

instead of having multiple micro-blades, you can have one long blade.

That is infinitely more difficult, working with flint or
obsidian, than is using multiple blades (or a type produced
for millions of years).

Your main agenda on this news group is to talk about stone tools.
Please, take *any* book about paleoanthropology or about stone tools,
the simplest one, the basic, you don't have to read it all through, just
read the basics, maybe only you have to read the titles, nothing more,
please. Otherwise the discussion with you is completely senseless. You
even don't know the basics, for god's sake. The basics. You have
Wikipedia, for god's sake, that should be enough. But you don't read
even that, and you have the courage to come here and talk BS. My god.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

On 12/18/24 6:22 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a Your main agenda on this news group is to talk about stone tools.

I don't have an agenda. You said blades are half a million years old,
I corrected you, pointing out that they've been in use for millions
of years.

Please, take *any* book about paleoanthropology or about stone
tools

Would this be the books that don't know the difference between
a noun and a verb?

https://jtem.tumblr.com/search/verb

You're welcome.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2