Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Grisly Find Suggests Humans Inhabited Arctic 45,000 Years Ago (sciencemag.org)

Posted by samzenpus on from the back-in-the-day dept.

sciencehabit points out this story which may rewrite the early history of humans in North America. From the Sciencemag story: "In August of 2012, an 11-year-old boy made a gruesome discovery in a frozen bluff overlooking the Arctic Ocean. While exploring the foggy coast of Yenisei Bay, about 2000 kilometers south of the North Pole, he came upon the leg bones of a woolly mammoth eroding out of frozen sediments. Scientists excavating the well-preserved creature determined that it had been killed by humans: Its eye sockets, ribs, and jaw had been battered, apparently by spears, and one spear-point had left a dent in its cheekbone—perhaps a missed blow aimed at the base of its trunk. When they dated the remains, the researchers got another surprise: The mammoth died 45,000 years ago. That means that humans lived in the Arctic more than 10,000 years earlier than scientists believed, according to a new study. The find suggests that even at this early stage, humans were traversing the most frigid parts of the globe and had the adaptive ability to migrate almost everywhere."

3 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. Stupid Question... maybe? by n0creativity · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am a sys admin and while I love learning about history, I definitely didn't pay much attention to it during my education days, so excuse my ignorance if this is a dumb question. How do they know that humans didn't just find the frozen, preserved carcass later on like this kid did, say 35,000 years ago. They find it and figure it's an easy way to harvest some tools which would explain the tool marks. Any science\archeology nerds care to shed any light on this for me?

    1. Re:Stupid Question... maybe? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From the article - “The impact wounds on the bones with embedded stone fragments is conclusive evidence that people slayed this mammoth.”

      They can often determine cause of death from skeletons long after any flesh has rotted or been removed. Impact strikes or piercing weapons leave imprints on the skeleton that are different to those of removing meat from a carcass. They can even tell which side a woman tended to carry her handbag from the dints left in her skeleton.

      Note - the following is not a diss against n0creativity - he asked an intelligent question and was wishing to learn - so good on you n0creativity.

      This is one of those things that some folks will never get. Because they cannot comprehend that some folks can know more than they do. It's why we have TV shows like "Ancient Aliens" where anything that humans have accoomplished is credited to aliens. Nikola Tesla? He got his ideas from Aliens, So did Einstein, Space flight, Pyramids, Nuclear weapons, Nuclear power generation. None of it by us stoopid hoomins. I listened to a guy this past week who denied the existence of dinosaurs. His proof? "That's just crazy", interspersed with "how did they know how old thes things were", "How did they know how to put the bones back together?" "That's just crazy!"

      Is it any wonder that many of these same people cannot comprehend basic science? How could scientists know things like this stuff,? Must be fake. Arguments from personal incredulity. Which guarantees that the dumbest person in the room wins.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  2. Re:Warmer. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Cities are disposable. Build a city, use it so long as it remains convenient to use, and when the water rolls over it, just abandon it.

    WTF makes people think we need to defend cities? You've forgotten your nomad roots?

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br