4 comments on “The Giants of Patagonia

  1. Holy cow, Great article! You have been holding out Roberto. Have you written about “population Y” before? If so I missed it! This is a whole new ball game!

    But…in this one they are still clinging to the land bridge theory. Why is it that they still insist all early man was hydrophobic?

    “Their explanation is that distant ancestors of Australasians also crossed the Bering land bridge, only to be replaced by the First Americans in most of North and South America. Other genetic evidence suggests that modern-day Australasians descend from humans who once lived more widely across Asia. “We think this is an ancestry that no longer exists in Asia, which crossed Beringia at some point, but has been overwritten by later events,”

    Lars Fehren-Schmitz says ” This scenario makes no sense to me. Why should they travel all the way from the far north to the Amazon without leaving any trace in the Americas? ”. I agree!

    Or…they came by watercraft. maybe even in reverse from South America to Australia and mixed with the African migration there. “We think this is an ancestry that no longer exists in Asia.”…I would venture to say it may have never existed in Asia at all. 🙂



  2. I have not written yet about Population Y but plan to. Yes they are still clinging to their pet landbridge theory which, frankly, I’m getting sick of hearing about just as the are still clinging to their Out of Africa theory 🙂 I’m pretty sure H. erectus was a seafarer at times. But this is not accepted because we have not yet found their boats lol. Yeah, likely nature pulverized them long ago or they are deep under water as the land masses were NOT the same as they are today.

    You know, IF I take the OOA theory of H. erectus migrating out of Africa, into the Levant, Europe, and Asia and extend that theory to include H. erectus “crossing the landbridge” (eyes rolling) they the very place I would expect to find H. erectus today would be at the very southern tip of SOUTH AMERICA!! And, that is where we find them IMO. I see a whole lot in the Fuegians that indicate H. erectus morphology. I can hardly wait for the day to come when we have some viable DNA from H. erectus and I’m willing to bet it matches Fuegian DNA to some extent. Likely the Fuegians were/are hybrids but I’m betting they have a more than normal splash of DNA from H. erectus.

    As I’ve said before, I think H. erectus was an intelligent and adventurous species who not only migrated about via land but also by sea. As for the lack of evidence from H. erectus in North America?….well…we find Oldowan stone tools here and more sophisticated stone tools here and I consider these to be evidence of H. erectus in North America. There are a few things about H. erectus that we do not yet understand. For one, why does later H. erectus have a larger brow ridge than earlier H. erectus? Answer? Retrobreeding!

    I also think it important to remember H. erectus started out using Oldowan tools and later developed Acheulean stone tools which were far more sophisticated that Oldowan tools. That took intelligence and creativity!! Obviously, H. erectus was smarter than we given them credit for.


Your Thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s