BS: How old is civilization?

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 26 Dec 07 - 05:34 PM

Enough, already. If one wants tales, 1001 Nights is more entertaining.

Chinese not smart? First seismograph, gunpowder, magnetic compass, movable type, abacus, porcelain, paper, paper money, whiskey, chess, etc., etc. And maps exist from the Han Dynasty onwards.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: 282RA
Date: 26 Dec 07 - 05:50 PM

The Buache map of 1739:

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i181/merrypranxter/buache.jpg
Here is what an About.com article had to say:

"Buache's map of 1739 is a combination of three basic factors. European explorers and geographers had been convinced for many years that a great southern continent existed, and representations are present on many maps; it would have been unusual not to find one on Buache's. Secondly, the 1739 map illustrates a procedure that Bauche followed for much of his life - charting and understanding the first-hand reports of sailors. Finally, the map reveals the early stage of one of Buache's conclusions. In 1763 the Gentleman's Magazine, a journal famous in the 18th century, published 'Geographical and Physical Observations, including a Theory of the Antarctic Regions, and the frozen Sea which they are supposed to contain, according to the Hypothesis of the celebrated M. Buache'. In this he explained his ideas, that in order to produce huge icebergs the Southern pole must contain a frozen sea, fed by vast mountain ranges and rivers. The large central basin shown on his 1739 map is a precursor to this idea."

Let's read that second sentence again: "European explorers and geographers had been convinced for many years that a great southern continent existed, and representations are present on many maps; it would have been unusual not to find one on Buache's."

So the contention that earlier maps did not show a true Antarctica but merely a counterland are not true. Now Buache's map may not contain anything mysterious in the sense that we are using it in this thread and perhaps the Piri Reis map doesn't either but the next sentence reads:

"Secondly, the 1739 map illustrates a procedure that Bauche [sic] followed for much of his life - charting and understanding the first-hand reports of sailors."

So sailors had seen glimpses of Antarctica prior to 1819. So, then, the question remains concerning the Piri Reis map. Even if it was produced the way Buache produced his map, what sailors did the cartographer talk to and when?

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: 282RA
Date: 26 Dec 07 - 05:52 PM

>>Chinese not smart? First seismograph, gunpowder, magnetic compass, movable type, abacus, porcelain, paper, paper money, whiskey, chess, etc., etc. And maps exist from the Han Dynasty onwards.<<

Obviously, you're wrong. Only the white man could have sailed the globe and made maps of it. Everyone else is too stupid. If that were not true, we'd have to revise our histories and everybody knows that we already know everything about our history that there is to know. Isn't that right?

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 26 Dec 07 - 07:32 PM

Civilisation died in the 70s.

Its corpse was mutilated by Thatcher, Reagan, and the current unspeakable Bush.

This desecration was glorified by Blair and Brown.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 05:59 AM

two arguments seem to be going on here:

1. Who is has been civilised in the sense of fair and just - well not the ruling classes of Europe as the rushed off and shared out the world for explotation

2. Some old maps may show that somebody new about the world before some others.

Is that about it 282AR?

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 09:16 AM

Civilisation is claimed to be many thousands of years old, but I can assure you that it is still only skin deep.

Evidence:
1) any pub after a dozen beers...

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 09:20 AM

2) any long running Mudcat BS thread...

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 03:15 PM

Foolestroupe nailed it , post 27 Dec 07- 09:16AM

Dictionaries give two meanings to civilized; one relating to technology, which seemed to be the intent of this thread, and the other:
the refinement of thought, manners, taste, the exercise of restraint and tolerance; to acquire the customs and amenities of a civil community. This the earlier meaning, beloved of dreamers.

Perhaps in a few thousand more years and with further evolution, but at its present developmental level the Human Species does not have the genetic construction necessary for overall civility, tolerance or cooperation.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 04:25 PM

And now it's a matter of hoping that we don't wipe ourselves out with the technological aspects of civilization before we manage to achieve "the refinement of thought, manners, taste, the exercise of restraint and tolerance; to acquire the customs and amenities of a civil community."

I fear that humanity is walking on very thin ice—and some folks are stomping!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Gurney
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 06:14 PM

First define civilisation. Most posts are about exploration or organisation.

Might as well try to define folk music.

I'm with Les in Chorlton.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 07:05 PM

Thanks Gurney, please join us in the Beech on Beech Road 2nd Jan for a singaround of mostly but not exclusively traditional songs?

Les

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 07:40 PM

10,000 year old stone civilizations are evident on every continent save for Antarctica. However I do believe that maps of Antarctica without its ice did exist 500 years ago.
Most mounded cities were built to defend against floods.

70,000 year old beach civilizations of modern man sang acapella around campfires as we do today.

I believe there were highly cultured civilations 23,000 years ago but their technology was limited to heat driven engineering using stone and wood such as heat driven ram pumps which are extraordinarily clever.


I see no evidence of metal alloys or whimsical notions of magic Atlantean power crystals 15,000 years ago but I am willing to suspend disbelief if Niven or Asimov used it as a ploot device.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Charley Noble
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 08:40 PM

And most likely the great Chinese fleets explored the entire world, not just the Indian Ocean and the coast of East Africa. What amazing vessels they had! It's rather a shame that the sponsoring Emperor died and whoever succeeded him had no interest in the world outside of mainland China. Well, it's a shame if you believe that the world would be a better place today if China had established a world empire in 1400.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 27 Dec 07 - 09:35 PM

Too bad Admiral Cheng Ho's sailors didn't leave a few songs behind- maybe they had a few chanteys. And think of all of the 'social interaction' when they went ashore at Zanzibar. Son of a gun!

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 28 Dec 07 - 04:03 AM

Where does this come from:

However I do believe that maps of Antarctica without its ice did exist 500 years ago.

Can someone say when Antarctica last had no ice? Surely it was a long time before people of any kind were about.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Dec 07 - 01:12 PM

Maps of Antarctica without ice are imaginings.
This website points out some of the difficulties encountered when one tries to interpret the map of 'Terra Australis' as drawn by Orontius Finaeus (Oronce Fine).
Orontius Finaeus

Antarctica became fully covered with ice some 25 million years ago, during the Miocene Era. The ice melted and advanced several times during the Pliocene Era (2-7 million years ago). Homo sapiens appeared sometime between 50-200 thousand years ago; the continent remained ice-covered during that time span.
Look up 'Antarctica Geological Time Line' in Google if you are interested. This website provides an introduction.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 Dec 07 - 03:55 PM

I think you can start figuring the age of civilization tomorrow, around 10 a.m.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Dec 07 - 10:04 PM

ooooooooold maps

http://www.sacred-texts.com/piri/index.htm

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Rapparee
Date: 28 Dec 07 - 10:25 PM

The fact that folks could draw maps and even may well have voyaged to places like NA and SA, the Antarctic, the Bering Strait, and various islands is hardly surprising. We have to face it: neither Columbus nor the Vikings "discovered" anything -- folks were already there and even had some pretty good "civilizations" going (e.g. Chaco, Cahokia Mounds, the Olmec).

What I suspect, but cannot find proof of, is that the Anasazi and the Cahokian cultures engaged in trade. I would find it surprising if they did not, given the trade routes which have been proven to exist in Pre-Columbian NA.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 12:46 AM

As noted above, the Anasazi were the ancestral pueblo Indians. They traded with the Aztecs, and even mined turquoise for them, especially from the Cerrillos area of northern New Mexico. The great drought of c. 1100-1200 that affected their sites (Chaco, etc.) forced them to move to the Rio Grande valley and elsewhere.
A rather peculiar theory traces the growth and development at Chaco to its monopoly of the Cerrillos turquoise and the trade with Mesoamerica, and its fall to the development of other sources. This theory ignores the role of drought and severe fluctuations in rainfall.
Obsidian was widely traded in North America; spectrographically identified specimens from Oregon have been found in New Mexico and elsewhere; Central American obsidian has been found in New Mexico-Arizona. Macaw feathers were found in Anasazi sites. I would not doubt some contact with Cahokian and other more eastern cultures, but my knowledge of the recent archaeological literature is miniscule.

Little known are tribes who specialized in trade, like the one from Texas described by Kelly, that could cover at least a third of the United States in a season (Washington state to Texas Gulf coast).

There is absolutely no evidence, archaeological or cultural, of any extra-continental contact by or with American cultures prior to the failed Icelandic-Viking attempt at settlement. The Aleuts may have been late-comers, reaching Alaska from Asia by following coastal waters, but timing uncertain.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 09:39 AM

And Kennewick Man came from...?

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 10:05 AM

Now, it's only my suspicion, but I kinda suspect that folks drifted around. From a North polar perspective there are quite a few islands (many inhabited) between NA and Europe -- it wouldn't have been difficult to journey from one to the other even before the Vikings.

Journeying down a coastline in a boat is easier than walking....

Mitochondrial DNA analysis might help here, as would underwater examination of now-flooded potential coastal campsites (which is being done).

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 01:48 PM

Kennewick Man

Found on the banks of the Columbia River in Columbia Park, just north of the city of Kennewick, south of Richland/Hanford. I've been there, indeed, during a hydroplane race on the Columbia River while I was working for a radio station in the area, for about a year, 1972-73.   Kennewick Man's remains currently reside in the Burke Museum on the University of Washington campus (a ten minute drive from where I live).

Kennewick Man lived around 9,300 years ago, and DNA testing has shown that he was Caucasian, not "Indian" (Native American), which means that he (or his ancestors) were not of the same stock as those who came across the Bering Sea land or ice bridge as, it is assumed, the ancestors of Native Americans did.

It has also been recently established that, although the "Clovis Point" cultures probably did cross the Bering Sea, not all of them did. Clovis Points (stone spear and arrow points) have also been found in Europe very early on, and anthropologists are currently attempting to reconstruct how Europeans may have come to the Americas. Epic sea voyages in small boats? Crossing the Arctic Sea ice?

Many people, upon seeing the reconstruction of Kennewick Man's face, have remarked on his resemblance to Captain Jean-Luc Picard. I doubt, however, that Kennewick Man was necessarily a space voyager.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 02:07 PM

Geographical correction:   Columbia Park is not actually north of Kennewick, it is west-northwest of Kennewick. The hydroplane races ("The Atomic Cup") were held WNW of the 240/395 bridge across the Columbia River. Columbia Park is the location of the pits, and it provides the best vantage point (except for sitting at home in front of your own television set) for watching the races. It was a couple of spectators at one of these races who discovered a skull, and that's when the whole thing started.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 02:29 PM

Kennewick man is not yet completely investigated, but the 'Caucasian' interpretation is rejected.

This paper from the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) explains how a native group is thwarting studies.
Kennewick man controversy

I understand that the remains have not yet been released for additional study and are still the subject of Court actions. Without further peer and controlled laboratory studies, the studies linked below are the best available.

The conclusions of one investigative team, Powell and Rose, 1999, Chapter 2 of the National Park Service summary of results, are:
The age assigned is accepted (see results of the radiologic team).
There is no study of native Americans showing changes from c. 9000 years ago to c. 1000 years ago, so the relationship postulated by the tribes (and the radiologic team) cannot be verified.
The bones suggest relations to the earliest Americans studied (remains from the Great Basin), the Ainu, and southeast Asian remains.
There is nothing to suggest relationships to 'caucasoids' from Europe.

No reliable DNA results were obtained (Chapter 5)- fossilization and contamination defeat current procedures.

The National Parks Service Archaeology Program on the remains:
Kennewick Man

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 02:37 PM

Try again on the AAAS paper:
http://www.aaas.org/spp/sfrl/per/per14.htm
Kennewick controversy

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 03:38 PM

Thank you for the up-date, Q. I was going on the initial reports that came out.

Just for kicks, I may head up to the Burke Museun and chat with the folks a bit.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 04:58 PM

AH! But it turns out that the AAAS up-date linked to was from 1998, and the National Park Service from 2004. So I went hunting.

The most recent information I have been able to find out about Kennewick Man is that the judgment that he was Caucasian was based mainly on resemblance. The attempted DNA analysis was inconclusive, and that being allowed to extract conclusively examinable DNA samples from the remains (if, indeed, possible) is one of the legal controversies. Current theories do not totally reject the idea that he might be Caucasian, but now include the suggestions that he may be Polynesian or related to the Ainu.

There also seems to be a certain smell of politics involved in the legal hassles. Native American tribes are seemingly not fond of the idea that they may not have been the first settlers of the area, and would rather take the remains away from the scientists before thorough study and simply re-bury them.

I haven't heard the latest legal decisions yet, if any. I may just check with the museum to see what they can tell me.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 05:30 PM

Native Americans could be descendants of the Great Basin - Kennewick types- 9000 years with no connecting links could encompass physical change.
Kennewick is not the only one of its type. It's been a while since I read anything on Great Basin remains, which seem to be similar.

I put the AAAS paper in because the tribes have been making more noises. NAGPRA notes indicated more court representations last year, but I have passed them on to my daughter. No idea of status as of today since the notes are printed some 6 months or more after the fact.
Put NAGPRA into google and some late information may come up.
The Great Basin tribes may complicate research on remains from the Great Basin area. See Nagpra Great Basin

The problem is that most tribes look on all early remains within the U. S. and Hawai'i as their ancestral property, and pay little attention to scientific investigations of the remains.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 06:42 PM

Arlington Springs Woman dates from 13,000 - 13,500 BP.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Dec 07 - 08:11 PM

Arlington, Kennewick, Great Basin, etc. finds are valuable in that they help in the quest for the first peopling of the Americas. They provide no help to the identification of early civilizations.

Australian artifacts dated to 50,000 years ago, and their location, suggest migration by boat. The Siberia-Alaska corridor is just one of the routes by which people could come to the Americas.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Rapparee
Date: 30 Dec 07 - 03:17 PM

The more I think about this question the more I want to say, "It should be old enough to know better, but it ain't."

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Dec 07 - 11:37 PM

I thought I saw a program on public television where some folks found remains similar to Kennewich Man in Ohio.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 31 Dec 07 - 12:15 PM

It's amazing that anyone takes the claims of the native Americans seriously! Can you imagine anyone of Celtic origin - or whatever - laying claim to a 9000 year old skeleton dug up somewhere in the UK?

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 31 Dec 07 - 12:18 PM

I think it has something to do with provisions of treaties that were enacted, and the broken, and then broken, and then broken, and.... Until the few rights that are left to the natives become very dear and perhaps overly protected.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 31 Dec 07 - 01:30 PM

True enough Riginslinger. I think the other problem is how the secular world reacts to religious demands. I think we generally accept them if they don't matter much and the faith inquestion is a bit powerful. So male circumcision is accepted but, and quiet rightly, female circumcision is not.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: GUEST,Slag
Date: 31 Dec 07 - 02:02 PM

Great post, great thread 282RA (Right Ascension?). The right question Q, how do you define civilization? Aside from all the regionally motivated quips, civilization is as old as mankind and seems to have its roots in innate mammal/animal behaviors, i.e. cooperation for survival. It may even go back as far as specie recognition! What an infinitely marvelous thing Life is! The degree of sophistication so early on in human development indicates a transforming point shift that became modern man. That alteration in nature has not yet seen its fulfillment and what it ultimately means is still before us. Will it end in disaster? Or a gradual shift to a new evolution? Can't say. Arthur Clarke and other writers of the Sci Fi genre have dealt with this theme for many years. Good thread. I hope to study this further when I return to my own machine.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 31 Dec 07 - 02:40 PM

Ok it's 31 December here in Manchester so I'd go for:

1. Public buildings for public use, the original meaning.

2. Everyone counts as one and none for more than one, a continued negotiated democracy and social justice and wealth shared on the basis of work.

All to be achieved:

1. In 2008
2. When this pub closes!

Have a good one

Les in Chorlton

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Folk Form # 1
Date: 01 Jan 08 - 11:46 AM

Well, England, as we know it, was formed between 500 to 700 AD. So, I guess civilization is about 1300 years old. I am glad I haqve sorted this out.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Jan 08 - 02:45 PM

The Romans introduced civilization to England. Did they take it back with them when they left?

Heading for cover

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 01 Jan 08 - 04:22 PM

It's hard to know. There reported to have left civilization in Ireland, and look what's developed there.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 04:42 AM

I think "Civilisation" was a live and well in Britain when the Romans arrived. Didn't they build roads so they could ship wealth back to Rome?

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 03:17 PM

Dick Cheney spotted Civilization tip-toeing down a hall in the White House, and he grabbed it by the scruff of the neck and locked it in a closet.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 03:26 PM

"By far the oldest possibly accurate historical reference on Earth
prior to our present century is found in two Stelae at Quirigua:

Stela D   Stela F

According to Morley, Brainerd, and Sharer, on page 559
of The Ancient Maya, 4th ed, Stanford (1983),
Stela D describes a date of 400,000,000 years ago,
which is about when North America and Europe began to
collide with Gondwanaland (including Africa)
to form Pangaea (and the Appalachian Mountains),
while Stela F describes a date of 90,000,000 years ago,
which is about when the breakup of Pangaea had advanced
to the point at which the North Atlantic Ocean was formed.

Much more recently, during the last Ice Age, Mesoamerica was a good place to live. The earliest known civilization in Mesoamerica was the Olmec. "

See further exposition and images of the Stelae on this page.


A

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 03:39 PM

Also from the above web site:

In Nature 405 (4 MAY 2000) 65-69, Walter et al report:
"... the 'out of Africa' hypothesis contends that modern humans evolved in Africa between 200 and 100 kyr ago, migrating to Eurasia at some later time ... the discovery of early Middle Stone Age artefacts in an emerged reef terrace on the Red Sea coast of Eritrea, which we date to the last interglacial (about 125 kyr ago) ... this is the earliest well-dated evidence for human adaptation to a coastal marine environment, heralding an expansion in the range and complexity of human behaviour from one end of Africa to the other. This new, widespread adaptive strategy may, in part, signal the onset of modern human behaviour, which supports an African origin for modern humans by 125 kyr ago. ...". (Image is from News and Views article in Nature 405 (4 MAY 2000) 24-27.)

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 03:48 PM

From another site, the following summary of early civilizations (depending on definition):

"Homo habilis , a maker and user of crude stone tools, appeared no earlier than 2.5 million years ago ( the earliest evidence of tool use). Fossils of this species span 750,000 years (at least 500,000 years)! Little physical change took place during this period, suggesting a successful and enduring species. The main features of the transition from Australopithecines to H. habilis are the use of tools and an enlarged braincase (700 cc). Physical features of H. habilis are almost identical to those of A. afarensis , showing that the primitive apelike characteristics served well for the role of this creature in nature for a very long time. H. habilis shows a sulcal pattern in the left frontal lobe, so H. habilis had at least the beginnings of speech.

Homo erectus arose in Africa about 1.6 to 1.8 and maybe even 2 million years ago. Fossil remains of H. erectus found in Bed II of the Olduvian Gorge are about 1.2 million years old. With the evolution of H. erectus , their tools became more standardised indicating improved communication and cognition between individuals. Changes in tool design were remarkably slow. This technology reached southwestern Asia by 1.2 million years ago and East Asia by 0.7 to 1 million years ago. By 500,000 years ago the Acheulean technology (click to see image of Acheulean tools. These are hand axes used by H. erectus) ©1 had spread throughout Europe. This technology was never used in Eastern Asia, where other materials, such as bamboo may have been more popular. By 500,000 years ago brain volumes and dentition of Old World H. erectus populations had attained modern levels and by 250,000 years ago the species had disappeared. The earliest Australian stone industries of perhaps 40,000 years ago, are similar to the Southeast Asian technology of the late Pleistocene. Homo erectus heidelbergensis appears to provide the transition between more primitive Homo erectus and Neanderthals and modern humans. The evolution of the former occurred well before that of modern humans from this ancestral species.

All hominid remains of the last 100,000 years belong to either H. sapiens neanderthalensis or H. sapiens sapiens. Neanderthals were hunter-gatherers who moved across Europe with the advance and retreat of the Ice Age glaciers. They were adapted to the cold northern climate and flourished during a warmer interglacial period between 200,000 and 30,000 years ago. Fossil remains provide evidence that they moved in small groups possibly occupying areas seasonally and subsisted by hunting big-game such as reindeer. Animal bones found with Neanderthal remains are mostly cold adapted species such as reindeer, arctic fox, lemming and mammoth.

Anthropologists classify Neanderthal tools as Mousterian . Early humans also used these tools, such as hand-axes, scrapers, borers, knives and points of stone. They are found beyond the Neanderthal range and associated with non-Neanderthal fossils. Neanderthal tools, evolved little during their history, and they did not use bone, antler or ivory. They may have used wood and regularly used fire. Why they did not make tools from their prey is unexplained.

The oldest modern human remains outside Africa, from Qafzeh in the Middle East may be as old as 100,000 years and those from Mount Carmel in Israel, 80,000 years old, but humans only flourished at the time of the extinction of the Neanderthals around 35,000 years ago. Migrants, which colonised the rest of the world, left Africa between 90,000 and 180,000 years ago, and reached China by 68,000 years ago, Australia by at least 50,000 years ago, and Europe by 36,000 years ago. Evidence from Human remains of the Upper Paleolithic (40,000 y.a.) shows that, by this time, humans were skilful hunters. They hunted horses, bison and reindeer. "

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: GUEST,Cluin
Date: 02 Jan 08 - 11:37 PM

"How old is civilization? "

I'll click the stopwatch on when we get some.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 Jan 08 - 07:32 AM

One can't help but think they'll find more information about Europe. It would seem much easier to get to Europe from Africa than to Austrailia.
                      And what about the Neanderthals? Wouldn't it seem like some humanoid nomads went to Europe much earlier, and then got trapped there by an ice age, or something? Otherwise, one would have to think they orginated and evolved separately in Europe, without any roots back to the original species.
                      That seems like a real stretch to me.

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Amos
Date: 03 Jan 08 - 09:09 AM

Neanderthals occupied Europe throughout the Ice Age, I believe. As did early homo sapiens during the recession. Could be wrong about particulars, though...


A

Subject: RE: BS: How old is civilization?
From: Rapparee
Date: 03 Jan 08 - 09:23 AM

Civilization, said Toynebee (I think it was), is like a large city, replete with art and museums and cathedrals and universities and libraries, which sits beside a riverbed. A trickle of blood constantly flows down the riverbed and sometimes the river overflows.