40,000-year-old bracelet made by extinct human species found (2015)
digitaljournal.com
digitaljournal.com
And we know this how? Maybe it was just made to be pretty. A rich person giving their partner a gift etc. No one could possibly be able to make any further inferences from a species of human we know almost nothing about.
Which is probably what they're going off of.
Also, if it's not that, where does that aspect come from then? How long have archeologists been doing this?
Doing what? Making assumptions and jumping to conclusions? That's a good question and I don't know the answer. How long have you been doing it?
Defaulting anything they should ordinary label as "purpose unknown" to "religious".
> How long have you been doing it?
Claiming that i am jumping to conclusions is ridiculous. I started the first post by saying i already thought my initial thought may have been doing that, and stated it as a feeling (subjective), and thus positioned it not as an objective fact but a hypothesis, inviting discussion. I was earnest, honest and clear. You're just being gracelessly sarcastic and dishonest.
And i think you're right about archeology. Most of the notable people mentioned in the history section of wikipedia are english.
The amount of time spent fixating on ornamentation should be obvious, just by spending time in a flea market, looking at the trays upon trays of common jewelry people toss tens of dollars at.
Amusement, and diversions should be obvious from watching people engage in repetitive tasks like crossword puzzles, card games and knitting. Fidget spinners fit into this category. Boondoggles have a utility in letting the mind wander. Polishing stone by hand was probably rewarding, when there were no consequences tied to failure.
Craftsmanship as a sign of status is probably the closest secular concept to the token "religion or magical thinking" and goes hand in hand with fashion and ornamentation. There are extremely slim reasons for the geek cred associated with odd piercings or those decorative spin tops based on the one from the movie Inception. Being able to show that you know about something, and or how to do something, displays skill sets without having to brag openly. The subculture of skin piercing and body modification displays a capacity for tolerating pain, awareness of anatomy, and a taming of wound infection in edge cases. Spin tops really represent membership within a nerd subculture that has money to burn, and fetishizes metallurgy trivia juxtaposed with movie trivia, but the craftsmanship of the pieces justifies their price, earning it's owner status, since there remains the authentic barrier to simply making a DIY inception top, contrasted against buying the collector's item.
Rare sneaker subculture probably encapsulates all three of these ideas without being religious at all. But observing sneaker collectors in the wild leaves me with the impression that maybe it really is a religion after all.
These are probably difficult concepts to communicate in academic papers that often must get translated into multiple languages, so the catch all religious, magical shrug will probably persist.
Also why many people cannot understand how the pyramids could be built without alien intervention
https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/3vd7aa/some...
How that influence is manifested could well be through religious (shamanism) means, but it could also signify a great warrior, or the dominant member of a family/tribe/etc.
Also, this is a completely different species of human. A bit presumptuous interpreting there actions from homo sapiens mindset.
For all we know they could have been Spock like atheists.
Nope. The Denisovan people are named after the cave and the cave is named after a hermit Denis who lived there in the 18th century.
[0] I am not an archeologist
http://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/n0711-worlds...
The only academic paper about the bracelet I could find is from 2008 and was submitted to the journal "Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia", whose editor-in-chief, Anatoly Derevyanko, is also the paper's primary author.
Your "fresh finding" was found nine years ago - this is even explicitly stated in the 2015 Siberian Times article.
All of the citations for the paper describing the "bracelet" [1] are for uncontroversial findings (that Denisovans existed, that they interbred with Neanderthals, etc.) - none of them make any reference to the supposed "bracelet".
[1]: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1563011008...
I find no peer-reviewed followup about the Denisovan bracelet. However, I do find an article in Current Biology about Denisovan and Neanderthal ancestry in modern humans.[1] The date estimate is about right: "[W]e estimate 44,000–54,000 years ago for Denisovan admixture."
0) http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.695...
1) http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822%2816...
Could not? Really? I would be very interested in seeing how that could possibly be true.
Without a better explanation of this line, I find this article very suspect.
Does "morphological similarities" have a particular definition in palaeoanthropology beyond the apparently plain meaning of the words? Even if "they" refers to the finger bone and teeth rather than the Denisovans as a whole, I would have thought they would have had some morphological similarities to modern humans, otherwise they wouldn't be recognisable as a finger bone and teeth.
Consider mules (horse + donkey) which are sterile or the infamous Ligers and Tigons (Lion + Tiger can make some monstrously large cats).
* In Europe which was home of Neanderthals at that time (middle/upper paleolithic) , there are beautiful artifacts in places such as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohle_Fels
* In Africa were Homo Sapiens comes from, there are similar places at that time where beautiful artifacts are retrieved like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enkapune_Ya_Muto
What experiments??
Thanks article! Useless.
Considering that the Stone Age began almost three and a half million years ago, that is quite a statement of precision.
It's not uncommon for two species in the same genus to be able to have offspring, for example equines (mules) and felines (ligers).
In some cases the resulting hybrid offspring are fertile, for example the "Savanna" cats which are domestic cats hybridized with servals.
In the wild, when previously separated species are put in contact with each other, there can be instances of natural hybrids. This is what happened with the various Homo species, due to various migrations.
While I'm sure the archaeologists who determined it was 40,000 years old had a good reason for it, jeez.
I'd be interested in knowing what techniques modern scientists would use to 'fool' other scientists, and then knowing when these techniques generally became available.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim
Ie. The half man / half God creatures from the Old Testimate that some believe are Alien hybrids.