Already in the 1950-ies Carter could present an enigmatic discovery of tools from the Middle and Lower Paleolithic stages, principally from his own work at Southern California sites. Though, with his own, solid experience at hand he could evaluate other repports of similar findings – ranging as far afield as Canada, New York, and Trans-Pecos Texas.

For some cracky reason Carters presentations were debunked, placing him att odds with collegues and mainstream institutions. Most unfortunate for the progress of the archaeological sciences in both America and Europe, of course. Luckily Carter was strong enogh to stick to his collection of evidences – and develop his work to present various environmental attributes of the sites in question. Moreover he was the first to profile how lowered sea levels in what is now the Bering Straits, could present a route to be followed by humans entering the Americas. Today we know that the 120 meters lower ocean-level would also allow a possible island-hopping across the North Atlantic.

Whatever the origin and migration-routes Carter could focus on the sites at hand – and by time present how the various paleolithic populations showed varying types of physical traits and cultural styles and characteristiscs – where a clear ‘Neanderthaloid component’ was found in some of the earlier populations.

In the days of hos emiritus Carter could evolve his comprehensive material to finalize his discoveries in the book. Although his results would still ‘have to’ be disputed, the quality of his professional attitude and work was reviewed as nothing but excellent – by his former peers and collueges.

Earlier than You Think: A Personal View of Man in America.
By George F. Carter. College Station: Texas A&M Press, 1981.

Review of the book by Professor of anthropology, Paul Ezell, is found here:
http://www.sandiegohistory.org/journal/81summer/br-earlier.htm

Today, 30 years after Carters book, its time to reconsider the paleolithic cultures, in terms of skills and abilities. Check what Chris Stringer & Co have been pondering over the last months;
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/news/2011/january/ancient-denisovans-and-the-human-family-tree93500.html

Moreover, the last five years have presented what we may comprehend as candidates for archaic migrations – one way or the other (!) – across the North-Atlantic:

700.000 yrs old populations – at the Atlantic rim:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/abs/nature04227.html

900.000 yrs old ., tool-making populations – in an arctic climate – at the Atlantic rim;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jul/07/first-humans-britain-stone-tools

Have a nice week-end!

Sure. To the misinformed:

http://passingstrangeness.wordpress.com/2009/05/06/the-auriferous-gravel-man-of-tuolumne-county/

“We’ve probably seen 100,000 handaxes this morning.” That happens in Africa at a favorable site. . The total number in the US: zero.”

Ever wondered why?!

Handaxes found in the Americas have consequently been dismissed as geofacts
If you want to understand why thee are no handaxes on the official records in the US you may remember the official mantra from the last 50 years; “There are no handaxes in North America. Period”.

May I remind you that a eventhough professionals have repported a number of paleolitic artefact from America they have always been disregarded as “geofacts” and/or “anomalies”.
Perhaps you have heard about highly regarded professionals standing by their analysis of 120+ thousand year old artefacts – just to ruin their careers?

Virginnia Steen-McIntyre – once a very promising geologist – for one. Her repport from Hueyatlaco, Mexico of 1962 (!) about a 250.000 year old handaxe became an “embarrasment” – and it still is. Not to her though, but to the text-book authorities. And you, it may seem:
http://pleistocenecoalition.com/

Here you may see some american handaxes too – from Calico:
http://calicochoppers.earthmeasure.com/Choppers1/

And type O is, again, most prevalent in Amerindians reaching 100% frequencies in South America. And it’s the least frequent in Africa. There’s a long standing contention that type O, being the universal donor blood, predated other blood types, specifically A and B.

While this could be a product of natural selection, an alternative is Haldane’s law, which states that hybrids are generally homozygotic (i.e. XX rather than XY in the hominin case). If Haldane’s law applies to human-Neanderthal hybrids then it follows that hybrid children will be daughters rather than sons.

This elevates the expected amount of X linked chromosome introgression to 50% greater than for the genome as a whole, and more if Haldane’s law has some effect in the second generation.

Anyway you look at it, I think we are all looking forward to the truth remaining far stranger than fiction as new genetic results continue to pour in revealing our heretofore lost past. There will be many more days here when new results are revealed, and all the bigwigs weigh in with their excited opinions, and insignificant others like myself are just fascinated flies on the wall, grateful to be alive in such interesting times.

I already know that you used the expression “amateur crackpot” only for that someone else and not for Gregory Cochran.

No, onur, it’s not you. Our conversations were indeed polite and not ad hominem. Also, gcochran is not an “amateur crackpot.” But the other fellow is. Gcochran just considers amateur crackpots “fine fellows” and sports the same unpolished manners and wits.

German, is that “amateur crackpot” me? I am asking this because I am a self-avowed amateur in genetics and human origins related stuff and you and I had previously discussed Out of Africa and Out of America theories on this blog and Dienekes’ blog; though our discussions had been in a pretty polite and non-fanatical manner.

There’s an amateur crackpot out here on the web, who also turns mainstream science into a fanatical belief. He also tries to correct me for the sake of other people. The problem with people like you and him is that you take pride in having very elementary skills (like calculating or reading textbooks) but you just can’t take it a notch up. You can’t do the thing called “thinking.” It’s not going to take much effort for me to recite the out of Africa theory and all the data points that went to prove it. I just think it hinges on cultural beliefs and not on science.

“Reminds me of another book I once read about humans originating in the Americas. I remember that the author (a Ph.D. in anthropology, natch) had the site locations for his digs appear to him in dreams – nice touch. ”

You’re talking about Jeffrey Goodman, the author of “American Genesis.” He claims to have a Ph.D. in psychic archaeology. What does it have to do with me? I have two doctorates in respectable fields from elite universities.

“I have no real expectation of changing your mind, because you’re nuts.”

Nuts? You believe that humans originated in Africa and then somehow crossed the Bering Strait to the Americas. I believe that humans originated in America (from an Old World hominid ancestor but you need isolation to speciate, don’t you?), crossed the Bering Strait and ended up in Africa. How am I more nuts than you?

Reminds me of another book I once read about humans originating in the Americas. I remember that the author (a Ph.D. in anthropology, natch) had the site locations for his digs appear to him in dreams – nice touch.

However, some people read this blog, and it wouldn’t do to let them think that you could be trusted to give a correct account of existing evidence, calculate anything, make a correct logical inference, or indeed think your way out of a paper bag. So I occasionally bother to point out what a fool you are.

I know this. And I know archaeologists who “defected” to the Clovis I camp after having experienced the sheer number of tools in Europe and Africa. But to claim that humans were absent in the Americas is a non-sequitur. Just leave this fact as it is. Don’t force an interpretation on it. Archaeology is a moving target. Time will sort it out. For comparison: there are 140 (!) unique language families in America and only 20 in Africa (on a good day!) This won’t change. Every language has tens of thousands of words. It takes time and isolation for these words to differentiate beyond the recognition of a professional linguist. Prior to 40-45K (and in some places even later), we don’t even know what species ultimately manufactured what tools. But language is a uniquely human product. You can’t miss here.

Plus, read the first published mtDNA study. It’s Johnson, M.J., D.C. Wallace, S.D. Ferris, M.C. Rattazzi, and L.L. Cavalli-Sforza. 1983. Radiation of human mitochondria DNA types analyzed by restriction endonuclease cleavage patterns. J Mol Evol 19:255–271. You’ll see that the basal haplotype was found at highest frequencies in the Americas? Exactly what X chromosome shows us.