• North American tool assemblages share affinities with the Paleo-Sakhalin-Hokkaido-Kuril region

    From Primum Sapienti@invalide@invalid.invalid to sci.anthropology.paleo,sci.archaeology on Tue Nov 11 23:53:39 2025
    From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo


    https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ady9545
    Characterizing the American Upper Paleolithic

    Abstract
    In North America, there are enough sites with
    relatively large tool assemblages predating
    ~13,500 calibrated years before the present
    (cal yr B.P.) to allow assessment of the
    underlying characteristics of their shared
    lithic tradition. Their shared technological
    features involve the use of dual core-and-blade
    and biface technologies similar to those in the
    Northeast Asian Late Upper Paleolithic. These
    dual approaches were often merged to produce
    small projectile points, including stemmed
    point forms using an elliptical cross-sectional
    ogive design. Similar dual lithic technologies
    are found in assemblages in northern Japan
    dating to ~20,000 cal yr B.P. We suggest a
    group with a similar lithic technology became
    isolated somewhere in the vicinity of the
    Paleo-Sakhalin-Hokkaido-Kuril region, developing
    genetically into ancestral American populations.
    Between ~22,000 and ~18,000 cal yr B.P., a subset
    of this population migrated along the southern
    Beringian and Northwest coasts into the Americas.
    By ~16,000 to ~15,000 cal yr B.P., they had
    become widely dispersed across North America.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JTEM@jtem01@gmail.com to sci.anthropology.paleo,sci.archaeology on Wed Nov 12 12:09:21 2025
    From Newsgroup: sci.anthropology.paleo

    On 11/12/25 1:53 AM, Primum Sapienti wrote:

    https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ady9545
    Characterizing the American Upper Paleolithic

    Abstract
    In North America, there are enough sites with
    relatively large tool assemblages predating
    ~13,500 calibrated years before the present
    (cal yr B.P.) to allow assessment of the
    underlying characteristics of their shared
    lithic tradition.

    That's circular.

    "They have a shared tradition so they share
    characteristics from that tradition."

    Why is that stupid?

    Solutrean hypothesis

    Suddenly shared characteristic are not evidence
    of shared traditions.

    This is yet another example of why paleo anthropology
    is NOT a real science. Because science, real science
    is consistent. As a matter of fact, repeatability is
    one of the tests of scientific work. Not necessarily
    the results but the work -- the means for arriving
    at the claimed results. And if you don't accept those
    means (like if they're not repeatable) then the results
    are moot.
    --
    https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2