Amirite, parents? Another RU-vid #shorts from your favorite science dad, Dr. Joe Join us on Patreon! / itsokaytobesmart Instagram / drjoehanson / okaytobesmart
The relationship between adult human and human baby is one of the most sacred primordial experiences we humans have honestly... I feel connected to every human who ever was because we were all screaming babies someone else cared for at one point. This is a cute & cool discovery.
Yeah, but parents haven't always treated their babies as the precious beings they are today. Think pagan child sacrifices and hanging babies on the backs of doors.
@@saltandsrirachaWe have and do, instinctively so. Cultural practices, trauma and more can overwrite that and there are exceptions but we have ALWAYS treated our children good. Human children are so fragile and sensitive we HAD/HAVE too
@@SpadezWilliams As a baby you wouldn't survive if no one cared for you. I relate to that later in life though as I have a parent who abandoned me... But just physically a baby needs someone there or it will not make it to say "I was not cared for" ;) you know what I mean?
Manny: I hope Sid we weren't lost! Diego: I also have the same doubt. Sid: no, after 2 km we would be at the seaside Manny: Sid you already said that at least 4 km ago. Sid: Perhaps it is true that we are lost.
I'm am archaeologist, so this was exciting news when it hit but not too unexpected. We have a few sites that push back the 15 000 BP dates, Topper Site in SC Kanorado in KS, Monte Verde in Argentina. As no Clovis tools have been found outside of the Americas that would go to show those folks were here established and didn't travel from abroad. Even 25 years ago going through undergrad we were taught that biological anthropologists, and linguistic anthropologists have data suggesting 25-30,000 BP. Though us young archaeologists tended to believe that data, from an archaeological standpoint we didn't have definitive proof. So those footprints, if that data remains and isn't disproven is the first real site to definitely say yes we can now officially agree with our sibling sciences. Now we just need more sites to strengthen that claim!
As a Chilean I feel it's my duty to correct you: "Monte Verde is a Paleolithic archaeological site in the Llanquihue Province[1] in southern Chile, located near Puerto Montt, Los Lagos Region. The site is primarily known for Monte Verde II, dating to approximately 14,550-14,500 calibrated years Before Present (BP).[2] The Monte Verde II site has been considered key evidence showing that the human settlement of the Americas pre-dates the Clovis culture by at least 1,000 years." From the Wikipedia article about Monte Verde. It's not the most relevant thing since there wasn't such a thing as Chile or Argentina at the time, but it might be relevant to note that it was on the Pacific coast, West of the Andes.
@@latronqui I apologize. I appreciate the correction. I learned about it 20+ years ago and either the person I learned it from said the wrong country or more likely I remembered it incorrectly, regardless thank you again for setting the record straight.
@@TheAmishUpload I'll be honest with you, I'm a North American historic archaeologist so what I know about Egyptian archaeology is just what I know through reading interesting articles and watching programs on it. What I know is: The pyramids were NOT built by aliens or used sound waves, or giants, or any other (frankly racist) BS like that. We know these were civic works built by workers most likely farmers during the off season. It was a way to employ the population when they could not farm. They were paid in grain and beer. We know this because archaeologists have found (for a lack of a better term) payroll records where workers were paid. They were treated well because archaeologists have found grave yards near worker camps that showed medical treatment to injuries presumably workplace related. In fact Imhotep, the architect of the Great pyramid, wrote a medical treatise hundreds of years before Hippocrates that details medical practices like using a slice of mouldy bread on open wounds and putting honey on wounds before bandaging them. Both having antiseptic properties. We know where the blocks were quarried and how, as archaeologists have found the quarry with partially cut blocks still in the bedrock, and have found tools both in the quarry and in the Pyramid. Also they know that because humans are imperfect and we rarely do things right there the first time that there were several pyramids that were screwed up before they figured the correct proportions. The Bent Pyramid is one, it was too narrow at the base and as such they had to change the angle at the top to make it work. We know they floated the blocks to a nearby Port. Now the cool thing is, a hydrologist just recently found an ancient channel to the Nile that is closer to the Pyramids than today so quite possibly that was used, though more work needs to be done to see if that was the case. We are fairly certain that the blocks were moved via sleds possibly on logs like the track exercise many of us did in sport training where as soon as the last log is out from the sled it is moved to the front. Experiments have been done that showed only a few people are needed to move several ton blocks using that method. From my understanding the current belief is that a ramp built around the outside was used to bring the blocks to the correct level. There is a theory that the Pyramids align to the Orion constellation which was a significant constellation for Egyptians but that is just a theory bantered about. There are pages in the plants and there is a below that there may be passages not yet discovered. A team recently used a non invasive study (maybe magnetometer maybe sonar I have no idea) and the readings came back indicating voids. The Pyramids were covered in a veneer of marble, but the Romans made off with a lot of that for their own use. That's about it, does that answer your question?
The fact that a likely precious moment between a parent and their child has been preserved for thousands of years and has rewritten our understanding of human migration is crazy to me
@@DesiGalCrochet I don't know about you, but the fact it's 20,000 years rather then a few thousands feels pretty significant to me, only farther amplifying the point of the original comment
This was discovered a while ago. And very interesting yes! A mother and a child walked a very far distance to another village most likely. They know the mother carried the child at some points because the childs footprints disappeared and the mother's footprints were deeper in the mud at those times (meaning she was carrying more weight). Then she dropped the child off and came back alone - they know this because there's no footprints accompanying her on the way back and her footprints weren't heavier again on the way back - meaning that she did not just carry the child the entire way back. So she walked a very long distance to drop off her child and then walked all the way back alone. It's truly so interesting that they could figure all of that out!!!
Didn't they also find the mother's return footprints with evidence that she came back without the toddler? The gait of the footprints indicated that she was not carrying a child on the way back
Yup that is true. It's led to the belief that the woman was trying to protect her child and failed. The other set they found match the larger footsteps but there is no evidence of a child on the return trip.
I saw this in another video. In the other video it also mentioned that the woman's footprints show her making a journey to somewhere and then returning back, and that the child's footprints are only shown on the first half of the journey. So wherever this woman had went, she had left the child there before returning.
@@ronjones4069 Thank you grammar police. I'm sure the world would have imploded if you had not have stopped to correct the slip of my colloquil speech into my comment. What would the internet would do without fine gentlemen such as yourself taking it upon themselves to correct every slip and flawed use of the English language. See you next Tuesday!
I just now got a video about how all humans are just humans, about how the pot thats in a museum was probably buried in the ground because someone burned their dinner and didnt want to clean it, a roman writing carved in a stone saying ,,I was here" was left by a roman solider in a different contury, and other instances of humans just being humans and still doing the same things
This gets much more tragic. The womans and kids tracks are found going one way in a hurried state, along with crossing paths of different animals, and then they found the womans footprints coming back, less urgency in the steps, and no child. This led the scientists to believe the woman was trying to escape some animal with her child, and she was not successful.
@@theanonymousgamer8394 it's not rocket science it's easy to infer that from seeing footsteps from children disappearing and then appearing again after a few meters
I think the point is that we can tell from the footprints what they were doing: the toddler toddled between the legs of their mother, almost surely while holding hands with her. So basically the very same way most of us learned to walk as well.
Another one of my favorites is a cave where scientists found dozens of painted on hand prints on the wall. I believe it was in France. One of the prints is much smaller and believed to be a child but it was at a height of an average adult at the time. This suggests that a grown-up picked the kid up to paint their hand on the wall
I love how the disappearance of the small footprints can say so much about people who lived thousands of years ago. We can see, possibly, how it might have played out. We didn't know those people, and yet we still know them, in a way.
We all came so far I want you all to realize this. You’re a product of thousands of years of work and dedication. Survival of the fittest you went through feudal ages, survived dictators and rulers, survived famine and plagues, went across oceans and fell land in unknown places. We are a product of our ancestors will power. Sit back and be proud no matter what is happening in your life. Know there is a past ancestor who risked everything for you risked their life day in and day out for you.
My mother had wanted to be an archeologist; she would have been a good one. Better yet, she should have been a politician……she saw everything coming that is now here, clear back in the 1960’s! She was just a farm girl; she would have straightened out a lot of things!
I worked in archeology here in Oz in the '70's but if you didn't find in favour of the current A bos you could not get funding or published. Archaeology is about facts, politics isn't
"Recently uncovered..." The prints were Initially discovered in 2006 and dug up in 2009 , that's nearly 2 decades old, I wouldn't call that very recent.
That's what you'd think, but then you have people trying to act like either every native tribe in North America migrated OR they act like the on-foot crossing never happened and I guess those people think it was all by sea bc of the Great Deluge. The science gets silenced when people have political agendas ig but all I know is one of my tribes had discovered Pueblo ppl and other tribes were already living within the caves after they had crossed the ice, and much of the evidence that suggest humans has been present since the dawn of our species is suppressed the same way evidence of crossing at all is also spoken out against. Some tribes speak of an age when they had all lived underground, and much evidence of underground habitation can be found worldwide. And some of these sites are so ancient, it goes against the narrative we've been fed.
Thats what I thought too! When my girl was learning g to walk she liked to walk while holding both my hands cause it made her feel safer ❤ Its so cute to see that this is a constant through humanity
“Mom, are we there yet?” *Meanwhile the entire tribe treading through the uninhabitable glaciers, the chill of death seeps past all layers of their cloth, its grip tightening slowly but surely as the hours seem to drag on for eternity, the cold seemingly slowing down time as well as they attempt the unimaginable* “Yes yes, we’ll be there soon sweetheart…”
This isn’t the only thing pushing that date back. Burials in Florida we’re dated to 18,000 years ago, and cave paintings in Chile were dated to 35,000 years ago. It does seem that the populations that came here earliest were either replaced or died off. Genetic surveys of modern native Americans show some very strange genetic markers which is indicative that they likely has some relations with earlier Americans
Religious people: science is ALWAYS getting rewritten we can't trust it Scientists: we have seen something different that proves it wrong so we will adjust for it Religious people seeing inaccuracies in their books: well it's a metaphor not 100% truth the line was used to tell people in their time to explain to their minds!
Virginia Steen-McIntyre. A very interesting story that all archeologists should know. But even more interesting is the research by Michael Cremo in his book Forbidden Archeology.
@@rusticcloud3325 then people shouldnt apologise for not believing one archeologists claims with no evidence. this isnt about them having all the evidence and being ignored this is just about their hunch not being listened to because there was no evidence other than heresay at the time
@@ThePurpleCheesecakeZebraif they actively shamed her I think apology IS in order. Stating that there is no evidence is decidedly different from hubristic judgement.
I have heard a story VERY VERY VERY similar to this, and it starts of basically like this, two footprints, one big one small, the small footprints occasionally disappearing and then re-appearing. The scientists were also tracking some smilodon (or some big cat maybe a saber tooth) footprints nearby. They said that when the footprints came back the way they were going, there was only one set of footprints. The big ones. And people think the saber tooth killed the baby. Idk if it’s the same story though
@@HisameArtworkon that topic that's actually how we know they picked up the child. Not just because the child's footprints disappear but because the footprints themselves change a little. If I remember correctly the left footprints start to dig in a little deeper, especially on the outside edge of the footprint. Implying that her weight shifted to account for the child now being carried.
@@birdsdribif they were attacked the footprints would smaller because humans when running put more force when the initial strike to the ground happens and the launching takes place aka the front and back are far deeper than the rest of the foot
I remember seeing someone else talking about this, apparently later on in the trail the woman’s foot prints change. When she’s carrying the child and the child’s prints disappear hers went deeper into the ground (cuz she weighs more now). However, towards the end of the footprints uncovered from the video I saw, her footprints were the same depth as when she was NOT carrying the child and the child’s prints stopped altogether, leading to speculation that the child died during the journey
Back in the early 1990s Britannica published an article in their science yearbook in which they indicated a similar date. We donated the books to my former school's library a few years back, so i can't check the specifics though.
Friendly reminder that the only reason that they never found anything older than 13,000 to 15,000 years is because they weren’t allowed to dig below that. It took two scientists sacrificing their entire reputations by digging below that line to prove that there were humans here before that.
So soothing to me to hear and see little bits of history like this This wasn’t something big It didn’t change the world It’s just footprints This mother likely didn’t do anything huge in her lifetime Nothing to be written about in history books Didn’t lead armies Didn’t invent technologies Didn’t birth a king Didn’t weave historical arts She just took a very long walk With her toddler And her arms probably got tired So she put them down for a bit And they walked together But the kid got tired, as kids do And cried to be picked up So she picked them up again And kept walking There’s no way this mother thought that moment of her life would be anything but a moment And yet here we are Thousands of years later Seeing the walk she took And imagining her and her baby Her little walk With her kid Has changed what we thought of history at the time And I think that’s the butterfly effect in perfect balance All she did was take a walk And so many years later It’s proof that she and her child existed And are not forgotten
@@nazaxprime exactly “Potentially” That’s the key word here Do you think this mom KNEW that? All she did was take a walk And there’s a chance that walk changed the world But she wouldn’t know She was probably just trying to get her baby to stop crying She was just walking Boil it all down And she was walking with a baby in her arms That’s it Nothing important in that action alone She most certainly didn’t think that walk would be remembered so many years later She didn’t think that walk could potentially change the world She was just walking Maybe trying to survive Maybe looking for food Maybe just moving, no real goal in mind But we know her now We know her And her kid She wasn’t doing anything important Not to her knowledge She didn’t think whatever she was doing would change the world She was just a regular mom for the time period But no matter what she thought She WAS important That walk DID matter And I find that beautiful She likely assumed she wouldn’t be remembered That her life wasn’t THAT important That her actions didn’t make a change that would be noticed or remembered But she did She mattered She was important Because all these years later We remember her
Science CAN be rewritten. And if the scientific consensus is "humans reached this place X years ago" and then you find evidence that they were here 10,000 years earlier, that doesn't add to the consensus, it destroys it and "rewrites science".
@@weareallbornmad410 Think of it this way. You do science, you dont aquire it. Thats what seperates what scienctists understands from the pubic. Please dont try and argue before reading more on it.
I'm not surprised. I saw something years ago that spoke of an ancient skull with hybrid characteristics. When the local Indian tribe didn't want their mythology questioned, they planted some kind of stakes or trees there. Decades ago.
Seems if that "sand" were mud at the time, there must've been rain or water in a creek. Which would wash away the prints. C'mon you know how mud reshapes & sinks easily. This story is a Spoof! Never existed.😅
Just imagine what those people tens of thousands of years ago would think if they could see how far we have came ,going from a species that used sticks and rocks to start fires to going to the moon and now we are even aiming to colonize other planets ,just even having the ability to think about it and then starting to come up with ways to bring it into reality is just incredible just think what our species could become in another 20 000 years
The rate of progress is speeding up. A lot. Expect it to get wild and crazy on short timescales. Perhaps fairly soon it will be far faster, and tech will be invented, developed and grow obsolete on over a few hours.
Coastal migration theory, right? We studied that in university last year as an alternative to the Clovis First theory, which no longer seems viable with the new evidence! It’s awesome stuff to learn about!
CORRECT..!!! The Eve of Najaron is a 42,000 Yr. proof that the humans inhabited Yucatán Peninsula before they started to travel North to the USA and Canada.. They crossed the Pacific Ocean using the Ecuatorial Under Current(EUC); named also Cromwell Current, landing in Ecuator and Spreading South and North from that latitude..!!🎉😊
@@jaimepedro2013 I think its established that 4 waves of immigration happened pre Columbus. 1st being Australian aborigines 45-40k Europeans 20k years ago ''native Americans'' 16-12k years ago and Eskimos 5-4k.
@@ocirontariocryptidinvestig8010 STABLISHED BY WHOM.. All theories are Euri and USA- Centric and just Speculations.. The Eve of Najarón of Quintana Roo State in Mexico is the only real proof that 42,000 Yrs. ago there were people in Yucatán peninsula and DNA related to the S.E. Asiatic Aborigins(PERFORMED BY UNAM and INAH)..!
I think it's a little of both. Some Polynesian or other seafarer culture getting knocked out to sea ending up in California and Mexico seems possible and another larger population from the ice bridge coming later.
@@TheBanshee90 THE INMIGRATION VIA Behring Strait was Impossible.. specially with women and children. No fuel, No Trees, No Shelter.. NO SNOW MOBILES.. NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER.. Quote One, Please..!!!
reminds me of a similar case with my own tribe--we said for ages that we used to live up north where the great lakes were before being driven down the mississippi via canoe and settling down in the appalachians for millenia. despite that, because our language came from a different family than the surrounding area, white historians went "ah, they must have JUST settled here in the 1600s right before we did!" even though our language evolution had made it so different to other languages in our family indicating thousands of years of growth apart. it's like comparing english and italian, saying "they're related, clearly english people must've come right from italy" when it makes no sense. then, finally, archaeological studies corroborate my tribe had been present in the area for thousands of years... LIKE WE SAID, but they acted like it was a new discovery. "indigenous people turn out to have a really good oral historical record and tell settlers their history, only to be disregarded, and then later settlers arrive to the same conclusion and act surprised" is all too common
I love this. There's a spot in Texas where I saw human footprints along side some 3 towed large animal, triangle shaped prints, and something huge and round with what looked like stubby toe marks like elephants have. I'm assuming now that the really big ones were from mammoths. They were all very obviously prints. In fact, I acked a geologist I met there about them and he said they were all footprints of some kind in mud that was at the time the shoreline of an ancient sea. As far as I know we are the only 2 people who have recognized them as ancient fossilized footprints. I had pictures of them in an old phone that died. Honestly, those photographers were worth more to me than the phone.
Was it in the Paluxy River in Glen Rose, Texas? If so, then the tracks there are genuine dinosaur tracks of various species from the Cretaceous. The “human footprints” are a combination of dino tracks that eroded in to a very vaguely human shape, scour marks in the riverbed that aren’t tracks at all, and deliberate hoaxes that were carved out by swindlers many decades ago. The tracks in the riverbed right now are all various dinosaur tracks, some of them just eroded or infilled with mud or other sediment to make different shapes and obscure the toes on some of the theropod tracks.
If you’re talking about the “human” footprints in dinosaur valley, those have been proven to be also Dino prints made by three-toed Dino’s and then the sediment then filled in the toes, making it seem like a rounded human footprint.
They did, it’s just that it’s still up for debate, this is a 100% sign of humans while the mammoth site is based off of hints of intelligent life, in the americas, in a time period where other evidence of it has yet to be found. Scientists will likely want more definitive evidence that is close to the time period of the mammoth site before they conclude that it’s evidence of a human or a close to human population in the Americas at that time.
@@kakahass8845unfortunately the more research that has been done on that site the less it looks like human interaction. There is just too many things that are ambiguous or incongruent if they were caused by humans. It's definitely a novel situation no matter human or natural, hence the debate. But as someone who actually has the opportunity to work with people in this field who study similar sites, few are convinced it's little more than an interesting natural coincidence. That being said they're still hopeful, I promise y'all people actually studying anthropology will be the first to be celebrating if we can prove it was caused by humans.
A little further along a set of male footprints can be found along those of a toddler. And then the toddler footprints appear to indicate the toddler jumping several feet just next to the male footprints at the same time the male footprints get slightly deeper.
There are other archaeological discoveries that have indicated similar or earlier timelines which are also interesting: Bluefish caves, Yukon, 24,000 years. Chiquihuite Cave, Mexico, 30,000 years (debated). Cerutti Mastodon Site, California, 130,000 years (very controversial).
Don’t remember the names, but I know there’s one in South Carolina estimated around 20k years, and another in Texas, 40k years old. I guess there’s a lot of evidence if you can find it of man hitting the Americas prior to the younger dryas event around 12-13k years ago.
Bro this reminds me of some old ass movie. Where this mama has to protect her child from nature traveling together soon leaving behind some footprints as it's a wholesome moment.
I remember when I was studying archeology there was a controversial skull found I think in CA , which was dated at 48,000. Lots of debate about it at the time.
Many small groups of people may have come to the americas and died off before a group was succesful. They used to think of people leaving africa as one group, now they know there was a lot of back and forth, even pure african people are showing to have a vary small amount of neanderthal genetics which means that some mixed neanderthal human people from europe actually migrated back to africa. Weve got long legs for a reason
Tbh weve known this for a long time through native stories and just common sense, but havent had the concrete proof we have today which is really cool!
@@PROVOCATEURSKalso considering how diverse native population is from place to place and there's been mutiple waves of migrations into and throughout Americas, I don't think they had same stories and could keep track of time as they didn't had same concept of time years and most things, even human civilization started around 5000-6000 years ago altough humans have been roaming earth for 300k years. Such stories are made up and people believed and spread a lot of crazy superficial superstitious stuff back then and silll do,
@@PROVOCATEURSK... I think they meant stories in general. As in indigenous peoples have stories that date that back in time, which is definitely possible.
@@PROVOCATEURSK many native people have stories of an ultra ancient time filled with unusual animals and environments in a vague "before" time that is likely the remnant of oral traditions from alllll the way back then
It's sadder than what was presented in the video. The footprints head north with the toddler, they can tell she had periodically carried the child by the uneven weight distribution and the depth of the prints. The footprints then are shown heading back in the opposite direction, separated by at least several hours of time, but the toddler footprints are not with them, and they appear that the woman was unencumbered, so she wasn't carrying the child. Nothing is known except a woman or young man in North America thousands of years ago took a child northward, and then headed back southward without them.
@@manysnakes yes exactly, the thing is we just don't know. She could have left them with family, or they could have been harmed, they could have been separated. That's what's sad about it, we can't ever know.
@@NevverhrrtCould even be like a mother deer where she walks until she finds a safe place to leave her child, then goes out foraging alone while the fawn or baby sleeps peacefully in a glade.
I remember reading about this in elementary school over twenty years ago. It isn't a new discovery, American archaeology is just stupid and mired in the political bullshit of egotistical academics who don't want their favourite studies to be disproved, racists who don't want to accept that any part of aboriginal oral tradition is accurate and religious nuts who refuse to accept that the planet is more than six thousand years old.
In times of drought, one can clearly see human footprints crossing paths with dinosaur footprints in the Paluxy River. I've seen them with my own eyes.
That kid is so long ago gone now. Sad. Any famous person in history that may feel so long ago now is a toddler-in-time compared to those actual toddler's footsteps. The bronze age was very futuristic and modern compared to that This got me to think weirdly deeply
There is also the cerruti mastodon site, which is not yet to be confirmed to be of hominin influence, but if it does, it pushes the arrival of humans in america back to ca. 100000 years ago. @miniminuteman has created a fantastic video explaining it.
most archeologists agree the ceruti mastodon is not evidence of early hominin activity. we actually studied this case in my archeological theory capstone in college. all of the damage to the bones of the mastodon can be explained by the presence of construction equipment driving directly over the area the mastodon was found. additionally no irrefutable human evidence was ever found at the site. no lithic blades, no evidence of encampment the lead researchers were also not trained archeologist or anthropologist.
I have heard of the earlier time. So long ago that it may not have been from Beringia. Hominins! I love learning about them. The first humans. Chimpanzee size until 1mya. Much to learn.
@@shelp7858 the spiral fracturing of the bones shows the impact they received happened while the bones were fresh. The cobble stones found with the bones also show impact marks consistent with the striking of large animal bones. Anyone who has studied the bones or the cobbles determine human activity it’s people who haven’t studied them that proclaim otherwise. The lead researcher was Richard Cerutti a palaeontologist someone far more qualified to talk about animal bones than an archaeologist. Seems whoever educated you is rather biased and failed to tell the correct story
@@Manbearpig4456 while yes spiral fractures for happen more often to fresh bones into not an exsact science and the cobble stones were moved by the excavator which more than likely caused the damage to the stones. if it were a human occupation site we would likely find way more evidence than just a hand full of cobble stone where are the blades? if it were human occupation we would expect to find dozens of lithic blades and hide scrapers and hundreds of stne flakes along side those none of that was ever found. palentologists study animals not human interactions a more suited professional would have been a zooarchologist, or paleo zoologist. I have a degree in archeology I studied at UWL and CSU both leading archology institutions additionally given the size and strength of fresh mastodon bones it's unlikely humans could have broken them with cobbles a fact that ceruti overlooks...
@@Manbearpig4456 while spiral fractures are common in animal human interactions they are not by thememselves, evidence of human interaction we find spiral fractures in dinosaur bones. 2 spiral fractures only occurs when a twisting force is applied to a bone not from smashing with stones. your saying a human twisted open a mastadon bone to get at the marrow it's laughable. 3the cobbles were likley damaged by the excavators teeth. 4follow up studies have found plenty of high quality stone around the sight yet we don't find any lithic blades. we should be finding dozens of cutting flakes and scrapers and hundreds of smaller flakes at the site. 3 we find no other evidence of human activity at the site .an animal as big as a mastodon would have feed a nomadic group for weeks.early humans would have likley made camp around the kill but we find no evidence of fire tool making or any other evidence of human activities.
Many humans came by boat: the land bridge hypothesis only explains part of their migration. It doesn't explain the polynesian and Australian aboriginee DNA in South America.
Its very possible that the Polynesians managed to sail to South America and engage in trade with the locals as They Grew Sweet Potatoes on places like the Cook Islands and mind you, the Sweet Potato was only native to South America so it’s more likely that they traded a few times and never looked back.
@@Crazyclay78YT the conditions for any kind of fossilization are so specific. It's awesome that these were able to turn into rock and last for centuries!
@@niveklaemtao1773This is false, carbon dating is a very well understood process that is actually quite easy to understand even with the most basic understanding of chemistry. Saying carbon dating is wrong is like trying to argue seeds don't grow into plants. It's not just a theory it's a very obvious emergent property of very fundamental and well understood processes in chemistry.
It was said the mothers footprints were deeper, implying she had more weight and though we see sabertooth footprints, we see no sign of a struggle. I'd agree with you if we saw a collision of some sort.
@WhiffleWaffles wouldn't they have been deeper due to all the force involved? Either way they would clearly be different from the normal footprints so you're right there's clearly no sign of a struggle.
Rewrite the science?? Science is observation, so we should never take scientific summation as the absolute truth as that summation is based on limited observation. If science never found the footprints before now, they couldn't observe them, therefore they have no knowledge of them & can't include them in their observations or assumptions to make a summation.
one of my favorite fossils is in the same park, it's a set of footprints from a couple children running around and splashing in a puddle lefts in the footprint of a giant ground sloth
Kind of cool. I’m thinking that changing terrain can affect the accuracy of ancient dating. Most likely correct as they’re footprints, but new/old pollen can be on different levels and not necessarily their own age
There's a trail of ancient footprints somewhere of two adukts with a child in between them. Every so often the child's prints disappear for a few steps and return with a pair of slightly deeper ones. The archaelogists realised that this was where the parents were picking the child up and swinging him or her between them, just as people do now with their children.
This kind of thing fascinates me because that woman would have had no idea how long her journey that day would have remained behind, she was simply going about her business.
I've noticed this too. I wonder if the glacial geology of the continent somehow contributed to the separation of the initial Canadian and American colonies.
Academia have NO frickin idea. They KNOW they are "knowledgeable " GUESSES! ie: Egypti and their inherited pyramids! That they DID NOT build !😮 ......😊❤
Yeah thats’s crazy that people were having so many kids back then. These days we’ve got wagons and strollers and everything else and it’s still not worth it to me to have a kid ever
