Comments on: Early hunters killed mastodons with mastodons (Also, you can chuck a bone spear through a car. Who knew?)

By: Trevor Jones

Trevor Jones — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 17:32:11 +0000

Surely this bone fragment could have penetrated the rib if the animal fell from a cliff to its death. there are lots of possible explanations and cyniscim but I feel that using this bone splinter to rescue Clovis theory is clutching at straws or splinters

By: Daniel J. Andrews

Daniel J. Andrews — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:44:37 +0000

They almost certainly did. Incidentally, when Waters mentioned the atlatl to me, I heard “axolotl”. That’s not a very good spearthrowing device at all!

But ninjas used axolotls as lethal weapons to kill mammoths.

wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_an_axolotl_poisonous

Or am I skimming too fast again….?…..

By: Conor Myhrvold

Conor Myhrvold — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 02:13:49 +0000

Great post! My only minor criticism is that I disagree with the statement “the spear-thrower must have had a powerful arm”. I am doing my master’s thesis at MIT on the biomechanics of javelin throwing. I don’t think a hunter would need a powerful arm to put a spear point in a mammoth bone, just a couple of steps, leverage and proper technique. Most of a spear throw’s distance is a consequence of transferring energy from your legs, and your momentum on the move, to your arms… and not from the throwing arm itself. The actual arm strength is only helpful insofar as it is enough to successfully channel the energy from the legs (via your momentum) in the desired direction and not cause injury.

By: yogi-one

yogi-one — Sat, 22 Oct 2011 20:52:50 +0000

“I’ve seen these thrown through old cars.”
Now THAT’s something I’d really like to see a video of!

By: John H

John H — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 23:41:25 +0000

The angle as well as the targeted area of the projectile appears to be just right for a hunter’s weapon. Maybe just a skoshe high.

By: amphiox

amphiox — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 18:55:31 +0000

I hate to think that after all he’s done, Haynes’ legacy may be as the last defender of an outdated Clovis orthodoxy.

A common fate for many distinguished scientists with the “misfortune” of having a career sufficiently distinguished and sufficiently long.

Methinks, though, that few of the individual scientists in question, minded, or would trade it for the “undistinguished and soon forgotten”, or even the “amazing, revolutionary, but brief with early flame-out” career trajectories.

Ultimately, it means that perhaps we ought to rethink how (and to what) we should be assigning “legacies” to, if at all.

By: Ed Yong

Ed Yong — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:02:06 +0000

They almost certainly did. Incidentally, when Waters mentioned the atlatl to me, I heard “axolotl”. That’s not a very good spearthrowing device at all!

By: Octavo Dia

Octavo Dia — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:24:25 +0000

The hunter could have also used a spear thrower such as an atlatl to provide sufficient killing power.

By: Ed Yong

Ed Yong — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:40:44 +0000

In fairness to Haynes, he also said the following to me:

The main point that the authors are trying to make is that there was hunting of large mammals pre-Clovis. All those things I like. People would have targeted the big mammals. As far as being 200-300 years earlier thn Clovis, that’s not a problem either. Clovis is a projectile-point style and there must have been people around before it was invented.

@Tom – Fair point, well made. Will watch that in future. I love that I’m MSM now.

By: Eleanor

Eleanor — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 08:56:59 +0000

I dunno, pushing mastodons towards extinction using spears fashioned from their murdered brethren seems pretty gittish to me.