Please welcome another imaginary friend

  • Thread starter Evo
  • Start date
  • #51
Moonbear
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,490
52


I thought she's always online. I see at the bottom:


"rootX, lisab, turbo-1, humanino, jostpuur, Maaneli, Moonbear, Penumbra, slider142, WheelsRCool, WarPhalange

Evo "
Really? Her invisibility cloak doesn't work in the who's online list at the bottom of the screen? I know I can see invisible people with mentor superpowers, but I thought other members could not see invisible people (hence, being invisible).
 
  • #52
Integral
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,201
56


He already is a member.
Definintion of existance = posting.
 
  • #53
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616


I smell rotten coelocanth!!!

I went to drpaleo's user page and saw that he joined on 07.09.08. So I went to the members list and looked at all the incredibly brilliant people who made the wise choice to become members on that day --- no drpaleo!!!!!

Perchance Evo lent him her invisiblity cloak?!?

I suspect the person posting as drpaleo is actually notdrpaleo! J'accuse :tongue2: !
 
  • #54
Redbelly98
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
12,115
151


I went to drpaleo's user page and saw that he joined on 07.09.08. So I went to the members list and looked at all the incredibly brilliant people who made the wise choice to become members on that day --- no drpaleo!!!!!
Perhaps he is from Europe, so 07.09.08 means he will be joining on 7 Sept. 2008???
 
  • #55
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616


Perhaps he is from Europe, so 07.09.08 means he will be joining on 7 Sept. 2008???
:rofl:

Good point, Redbelly...I'll put it in my personal calendar to check the new members on 8 Sept. 2008!!!!
 
  • #56
Redbelly98
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
12,115
151


In the meantime, let me just say to drpaleo that I look forward to your joining our group next month. And a hearty, {insert antonym of belated here} Welcome to PF!
 
  • #57
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616


In the meantime, let me just say to drpaleo that I look forward to your joining our group next month. And a hearty, {insert antonym of belated here} Welcome to PF!
Hmmm...preliminary? Expectant? Anticipatory?

Yes...an anticipatory welcome!
 
  • #58
2
0


Andre raises a few interesting and informed points, but he is profoundly wrong, I think in his dismissal of Martin's hypothesis. I will explain at length later. Watch for my article forthcoming next December in Gary Haynes' edited volume (Springer Press).
 
  • #59
1,134
9


Hi drpaleo, nice of you to stop by.
 
  • #60
4,465
72


Hello all. I am not just another one of Evo's giant rabbits! The comparison to Brad Pitt was due to my supposed no hold barred feistiness in the dispute over exactly when the Indians' ancestors arrived here (about 13,000 years ago, IMHO). I have not been meek in my criticism of phony evidence for an earlier human presence. However, the hyper-aggressive caricature in "Science" was a bit of an exaggeration.

DrPaleo
Whilst there is no reason to doubt your assessment of the evidence of artifacts of sites like Monte Verde, Topper, Cactus hill, etc, then the question arises what would be needed to convince you that pre-Clovis people were present indeed in the Americas.

Then there is also the Hueyatlaco debate, which indeed may be explained differently (mud flow). See:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=109359

Also as you are aware the "13,000 years ago", indication may be subject to confusion. If that's carbon dated then it would convert to ~15,330 calendar years BP, which is about 15,390 actual years ago using the INTCAL04 calibration table.

Looking forward to a fair debate :smile:
 
  • #61
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,812
6


Really? Her invisibility cloak doesn't work in the who's online list at the bottom of the screen? I know I can see invisible people with mentor superpowers, but I thought other members could not see invisible people (hence, being invisible).
I think its just the bit that shows the mentor for the forum.
 
  • #62
Redbelly98
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
12,115
151


Hmmm...preliminary? Expectant? Anticipatory?

Yes...an anticipatory welcome!
Thank you Lisa! I was posting at 11 pm, and my daily allotment of thoughts had just run out. :blushing:
 
  • #63
lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,887
616


Thank you Lisa! I was posting at 11 pm, and my daily allotment of thoughts had just run out. :blushing:
That can (and does) happen to me at any time of day...:cry: !
 
  • #64
Evo
Mentor
23,153
2,773


I think its just the bit that shows the mentor for the forum.
Yes, that just means I'm the forum mentor, not that I'm online.
 
  • #65
794
1


Whilst there is no reason to doubt your assessment of the evidence of artifacts of sites like Monte Verde, Topper, Cactus hill, etc, then the question arises what would be needed to convince you that pre-Clovis people were present indeed in the Americas.

Then there is also the Hueyatlaco debate, which indeed may be explained differently (mud flow). See:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=109359

Also as you are aware the "13,000 years ago", indication may be subject to confusion. If that's carbon dated then it would convert to ~15,330 calendar years BP, which is about 15,390 actual years ago using the INTCAL04 calibration table.

Looking forward to a fair debate :smile:
yes, and the 'out of Africa' migration of about 500,000 years ago (Neanderthals), 70,000 years ago (Cro-Magnons) and again about 40,000 years ago that caused the initial human population of Europe, India, Australia, Hawaii, and a lot of the Pacific islands (with a later migration of those of Asian descent)--who knows (because they already have found very early evidence of possible African migration to South America) if its 15,390 or 40,000 years ago, or maybe they will yet discover 1/2 million year old evidence of Man in America (Sasquatch, Bigfoot, Yeti, Abominable Snowman).
 
Last edited:
  • #66
Evo
Mentor
23,153
2,773


rew, the subject is in the Americas. :smile:
 
  • #67
794
1


(it was)
 
  • #68
4,465
72


Andre raises a few interesting and informed points, but he is profoundly wrong, I think in his dismissal of Martin's hypothesis. I will explain at length later. Watch for my article forthcoming next December in Gary Haynes' edited volume (Springer Press).
Looking forward to a discusion in due time. Meanwhile, this would be my introduction to the discussion.

the overkill hypothesis is described very well here:

http://www.amnh.org/science/biodiversity/extinction/Day1/overkill/Bit1.html
http://www.amnh.org/science/biodiversity/extinction/Day1/overkill/Bit2.html
http://www.amnh.org/science/biodiversity/extinction/Day1/overkill/Bit2.html

The essence:
According to the overkill hypothesis, when ancestors of native Americans entered North America about 14,000 calendar years ago, they encountered a large number of species that had no experience with humans. As a result, they did not recognize humans as a threat. The ancestral Indians (or Paleo-Indians, as they are sometimes called) were able to take advantage of this fact and were able to hunt the large mammals with great ease. The Paleo-Indians became specialist big game hunters concentrating on game like mammoths, giant bison, ground sloths, and other species of large size. They hunted dozens of species to the point of extinction, and indirectly caused the extinction of many smaller species as a consequence of ecological disruption.

Because the evidence is mounting that the North American extinctions occurred very rapidly--perhaps in less than 1,000 years--Martin has dubbed the hypothesized overkill event as a "Blitzkrieg" or "lightning war."
We would focus on the question if the overkill hypothesis can be falsified.

The first element is the entrance of humans (Clovis) in N America at 14,000 calendar years ago (assumingly via the dry Beringia landbridge), not before. The main debate has been about the before-Clovis dating of artefacts or if the artifacts were genuine, however I will demonstrate that other evidence, following from abundant research of mitochondrial DNA and human parasite migration raises some doubt about this earliest migration. Obviously, an earlier entry would falsify the blitzkrieg idea.

A second element is the synchronisation. It appears that some species were in the full process of dying out, as determined by declining sizes of fossil bones (horses) before the human arrival; while others survived the assumed first strike for some millenia (mastodon)

A third element is the environment, climate and biotope changes. During all of this there should not be any climate changes that could have lead to extinctions, neither in the Americas nor elsewhere. I will demonstrate that massive extinction events in South America and Eurasia cannot be linked to anthropogenic causes, while there was lot's of simultaneous climate changes going on, changing the biotopes, including in North America. This in turn favored other species, better equipped (modern bison), competing with the doomed species and taking over the changing niches.

A fourth element is the apparantly missing earlier megafauna extinctions during equally violent climate changes during the Pleistocene (2.5 Million years - 10,000 14C years ago). However, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And the earlier paleonthologic remains are much much more scarce. Nevertheless, it shows that the species overturn rate during the Pleistocene was substantial, many species did go extinct indeed to be replaced by other. However these mineralized remains cannot be dated accurately since the original material was replaced. So it's not possible to esthablish an adequate chronology for these remains and establish a pattern for extinctions. Moreover, the main killer, the transitions in and out the Younger Dryas, appears to be unique indeed during the Pleistocene.

In conclusion, while it would not be disputed that migrating man might have killed off many naive specimens, nevertheless all the elements were there for the climate to do the real job, which may perhaps have included eradicating Clovis himself as well, as it seemed to have vanished completely with his alleged victims.

So where would that thread go? Biology or Earth?

References here (excluding the anthropologic publications, those will follow later)
 
Last edited:
  • #69
G01
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,665
16


Hi Dr. Paleo! Nice to meet you! I am always happy to meet another segment of Evo's apparently split personality. :biggrin:
 

Related Threads on Please welcome another imaginary friend

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
506
  • Last Post
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
63
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
Top