Link from roughbarked in Chat:
https://www.smh.com.au/technology/aboriginal-archaeological-discovery-in-kakadu-rewrites-the-history-of-australia-20170719-gxe3qy.html

“Among the trove of discoveries are the world’s oldest stone axes with polished and sharpened edges, proving that the earliest Australians were among the most sophisticated tool-makers of their time: no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years.”

It’s possible that they developed their toolmaking techniques after arrival, but isn’t it more likely that they brought the techniques with them, since they had the technology to make sea-going boats before they arrived here?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Link from roughbarked in Chat:
https://www.smh.com.au/technology/aboriginal-archaeological-discovery-in-kakadu-rewrites-the-history-of-australia-20170719-gxe3qy.html

“Among the trove of discoveries are the world’s oldest stone axes with polished and sharpened edges, proving that the earliest Australians were among the most sophisticated tool-makers of their time: no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years.”

It’s possible that they developed their toolmaking techniques after arrival, but isn’t it more likely that they brought the techniques with them, since they had the technology to make sea-going boats before they arrived here?

Axe making good, boat building not so much.

What’s wrong with boat building?

The Rev Dodgson said:

What’s wrong with boat building?

They weren’t very good at it.

The Rev Dodgson said:

What’s wrong with boat building?

It leads to yacht clubs.

‘Athletes and campaigners for clean sport react with dismay as the World Anti-Doping Agency agrees to lift the ban on Russian athletes, opening the door for their return to athletics, weightlifting and paralympics.’ – ABC News

Whack-oh! Let the freak show begin!

Oops. Wrong thread.

Peak Warming Man said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

What’s wrong with boat building?

They weren’t very good at it.

How do you know?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Peak Warming Man said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

What’s wrong with boat building?

They weren’t very good at it.

How do you know?

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Peak Warming Man said:

They weren’t very good at it.

How do you know?

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

They may have been restrained by onerous ISO9001 paper work.

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Peak Warming Man said:

They weren’t very good at it.

How do you know?

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

After getting here, why would they need ocean going boats? They could stop the boats, so to speak …

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Peak Warming Man said:

They weren’t very good at it.

How do you know?

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

Is it?

Lack of continuous progress doesn’t seem to me much of an indication of the standard of technology in the past. What culture has had continuous progress over more than 1000 years, let alone 65,000?

poikilotherm said:

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

How do you know?

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

After getting here, why would they need ocean going boats? They could stop the boats, so to speak …

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

The Rev Dodgson said:

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

How do you know?

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

Is it?

Lack of continuous progress doesn’t seem to me much of an indication of the standard of technology in the past. What culture has had continuous progress over more than 1000 years, let alone 65,000?

Hey, it’s Friday.

Lighten up a bit, Mr. Literal, and don’t take everything so seriously.

Peak Warming Man said:

poikilotherm said:

captain_spalding said:

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

After getting here, why would they need ocean going boats? They could stop the boats, so to speak …

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

jesus!

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

captain_spalding said:

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

Is it?

Lack of continuous progress doesn’t seem to me much of an indication of the standard of technology in the past. What culture has had continuous progress over more than 1000 years, let alone 65,000?

Hey, it’s Friday.

Lighten up a bit, Mr. Literal, and don’t take everything so seriously.

Well, same to you.

We’re not allowed to ask questions now?

JudgeMental said:

Peak Warming Man said:

poikilotherm said:

After getting here, why would they need ocean going boats? They could stop the boats, so to speak …

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

jesus!

Just up and walked from Timor…

Peak Warming Man said:

poikilotherm said:

captain_spalding said:

When your naval architecture hasn’t progressed beyond dugouts and and bark canoes after 65,000 years of inhabiting a place, it’s a bit of a hint.

After getting here, why would they need ocean going boats? They could stop the boats, so to speak …

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

Wallace disagrees.
I agree with Wallace.

poikilotherm said:

JudgeMental said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

jesus!

Just up and walked from Timor…

And yet modern people with protective clothing and boots to protect their feet go for a 40k walk on the weekend and come in on Monday complaining of sore muscles, aching feet, tiredness…………………..

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

poikilotherm said:

After getting here, why would they need ocean going boats? They could stop the boats, so to speak …

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

Wallace disagrees.
I agree with Wallace.

I’m with Gromit.

Peak Warming Man said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

Wallace disagrees.
I agree with Wallace.

I’m with Gromit.

Wrong trousers eh?

Peak Warming Man said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

Wallace disagrees.
I agree with Wallace.

I’m with Gromit.

cheesus!

Peak Warming Man said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t thing Aborigines were boat people, I reckon they walked here.

Wallace disagrees.
I agree with Wallace.

I’m with Gromit.

Yes, they rowed their dogs.

Peak Warming Man said:

poikilotherm said:

JudgeMental said:

jesus!

Just up and walked from Timor…

And yet modern people with protective clothing and boots to protect their feet go for a 40k walk on the weekend and come in on Monday complaining of sore muscles, aching feet, tiredness…………………..

The ancients didn’t need to show up for work on Mondays. They could take the day orf.

The ocean crossing from Asia to Australia is one of humanity’s great early achievements, but it’s one that is shrouded in mystery. Why modern humans made the journey, and when, are still open questions that scientists are keen to answer because they could hold the key to understanding when our ancestors first left Africa and whether they did so in one wave or in a staggered exodus spread out over millennia.

Archaeological evidence reveals that modern humans had spread into Southeast Asia from Africa by about 60,000 years ago, and that they were in Australia by about 50,000 years ago. The earliest known evidence of human occupation in Australia is a rock shelter in the Northern Territory that is about 55,000 years old, while the oldest human fossils ever discovered in Australia are about 10,000 years younger. Spencer Wells, a geneticist and a National Geographic explorer-in-residence, has speculated that the first Australians landed in northern Australia and Papua New Guinea—then part of the same landmass—and gradually moved inland by following the river systems of Queensland and southern Australia.

The First Explorers?

Anthropologists have long debated whether modern humans left Africa only once and then radiated around the globe, or if there were multiple journeys out of the continent. Previously, the most widely accepted theory was that all modern humans derive from a single out-of-Africa migration wave into Europe, Asia, and Australia. According to this model, the first Australians branched off from an Asian population that had already separated from the ancestors of Europeans.

But in 2011, this conventional wisdom was challenged by a new discovery. Using modern gene sequencing techniques, researchers sampled the DNA from a lock of hair that a young Aboriginal man had donated to a British anthropologist in 1923. When DNA in the hair was compared with the genomes of people living in Asia, Europe, and Africa, scientists discovered that Aboriginal Australians are more closely related to Africans than they are to modern Asians and Europeans.

This suggests humans migrated into Eastern Asia in multiple waves and that today’s Aboriginal Australians are descended from an early wave that left Africa about 70,000 years ago, before the ancestors of Asians and Europeans. If confirmed, the finding means that present-day Aboriginal Australians are the oldest population of humans living outside of Africa…

Reaching Australia would have presented significant challenges for ancient humans. An ocean has always separated Asia and Oceania, and travel between the two continents would have required humans to navigate dozens of miles of open water. Whether humans colonized Australia intentionally or by accident—after being blown there by monsoon winds, for example—is unknown, although National Geographic’s Wells thinks the former scenario is more likely.

Another mystery is what kind of water vessels early humans used to reach Australia. None of the boats used by Aboriginal people in ancient times are suitable for major voyages, and some have suggested early humans reached the continent on rafts made of bamboo, a material common in Asia.

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/migration-to-australia/

What really matters.

Perhaps Aboriginals evolved separately to other human populations all from a common ancestor(s) that existed here previously

Seems to suggest that early humans (the ones that migrated out of Africa anyway) were a coastal adapted species. That they lived on or around the coastal zones, and that they used boats of some description. This way they could migrate quickly from Africa all the way around to Indonesia in just a few thousand years by hugging the coast. They wouldn’t need to adapt to each different land climate (deserts, rainforest, savannahs etc) along the way.

Cymek said:

Perhaps Aboriginals evolved separately to other human populations all from a common ancestor(s) that existed here previously

The DNA modeling tells the opposite story.

The fact that these people had stone ground axes, suggests a degree of sophisticated toolmaking and probably other advanced survival skills. They could cut down trees (or Bamboo) and likely had the means of tying them together to make a raft. These axes and their time of arrival in Australia answers many unknowns and open new avenues of thinking.

PermeateFree said:

The fact that these people had stone ground axes, suggests a degree of sophisticated toolmaking and probably other advanced survival skills. They could cut down trees (or Bamboo) and likely had the means of tying them together to make a raft. These axes and their time of arrival in Australia answers many unknowns and open new avenues of thinking.

Not really, it just adjusts the timeline a bit. It has long been known that humans needed some kind of water craft, and therefore the necessary tools to make them, in order to get here.

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

The fact that these people had stone ground axes, suggests a degree of sophisticated toolmaking and probably other advanced survival skills. They could cut down trees (or Bamboo) and likely had the means of tying them together to make a raft. These axes and their time of arrival in Australia answers many unknowns and open new avenues of thinking.

Not really, it just adjusts the timeline a bit. It has long been known that humans needed some kind of water craft, and therefore the necessary tools to make them, in order to get here.

Link from 2003 (via TATE):

https://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/000236.html

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

The fact that these people had stone ground axes, suggests a degree of sophisticated toolmaking and probably other advanced survival skills. They could cut down trees (or Bamboo) and likely had the means of tying them together to make a raft. These axes and their time of arrival in Australia answers many unknowns and open new avenues of thinking.

Not really, it just adjusts the timeline a bit. It has long been known that humans needed some kind of water craft, and therefore the necessary tools to make them, in order to get here.

Previous information indicated their arrival in Australia was much later and although they had to have come by sea, we could only imagine the sort of craft they were capable of making. Also their toolmaking sophistication was considered to be much less even then, but we now know they were smarter than we had thought.

1803
Campfire and rolled-bark or reed fishing canoes, Tasmania, 1803.

Nicholas Petit: View of Schouten Island, Van Diemen’s Land, 1803
- Museum d’Historie naturelle, Le Harve.

sarahs mum said:

1803
Campfire and rolled-bark or reed fishing canoes, Tasmania, 1803.

Nicholas Petit: View of Schouten Island, Van Diemen’s Land, 1803
- Museum d’Historie naturelle, Le Harve.

Apparently it was normal to go fishing or got to Bruny or Maria Island in one of these. Not for me. I get worried on the Bruny ferry.

I wonder what the odds of making it here were, not high I imagine

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

The fact that these people had stone ground axes, suggests a degree of sophisticated toolmaking and probably other advanced survival skills. They could cut down trees (or Bamboo) and likely had the means of tying them together to make a raft. These axes and their time of arrival in Australia answers many unknowns and open new avenues of thinking.

Not really, it just adjusts the timeline a bit. It has long been known that humans needed some kind of water craft, and therefore the necessary tools to make them, in order to get here.

Previous information indicated their arrival in Australia was much later and although they had to have come by sea, we could only imagine the sort of craft they were capable of making. Also their toolmaking sophistication was considered to be much less even then, but we now know they were smarter than we had thought.

I’m already on that line of thinking.

I like the hypothesis of an early group of humans becoming adapted to a coastal lifestyle. That probably included building boats of some kind or other, or even rafts. In fact the invention of the boat is perhaps the things that facilitated migration out of Africa. So by the time they got to Indonesia they had already perfected the techniques and the tools.

I don’t think this has become the accepted hypothesis yet, because it is going to be very hard to come up with solid proof, given that much of the coastline is now submerged post ice-age.

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

The fact that these people had stone ground axes, suggests a degree of sophisticated toolmaking and probably other advanced survival skills. They could cut down trees (or Bamboo) and likely had the means of tying them together to make a raft. These axes and their time of arrival in Australia answers many unknowns and open new avenues of thinking.

Not really, it just adjusts the timeline a bit. It has long been known that humans needed some kind of water craft, and therefore the necessary tools to make them, in order to get here.

Link from 2003 (via TATE):

https://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/000236.html

The fact that they were tooling around on Rotto 70,000 years ago means things haven’t changed much.

Ian said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

party_pants said:

Not really, it just adjusts the timeline a bit. It has long been known that humans needed some kind of water craft, and therefore the necessary tools to make them, in order to get here.

Link from 2003 (via TATE):

https://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/000236.html

The fact that they were tooling around on Rotto 70,000 years ago means things haven’t changed much.

LOL

The Rev Dodgson said:

Link from roughbarked in Chat:
https://www.smh.com.au/technology/aboriginal-archaeological-discovery-in-kakadu-rewrites-the-history-of-australia-20170719-gxe3qy.html

“Among the trove of discoveries are the world’s oldest stone axes with polished and sharpened edges, proving that the earliest Australians were among the most sophisticated tool-makers of their time: no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years.”

It’s possible that they developed their toolmaking techniques after arrival, but isn’t it more likely that they brought the techniques with them, since they had the technology to make sea-going boats before they arrived here?

Although I see what you’re getting at, the paucity of data should lead one to be cautious about such statements.

I think the authors, too, are a bit bold in saying “no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years”. Until these finds, we didn’t know about this set of people having those skills, so there’s obviously a good chance there were similar skills elsewhere at a similar time and we just haven’t found the evidence yet. The known record is scant.

With regard to boat building: you wouldn’t need to be Jacques-Noël Sané to get from the Sunda to the Sahul during an ice age. You could do it on a two-log raft or a dugout canoe.

Has anyone mentioned the aquatic ape hypothesis?

sibeen said:

Has anyone mentioned the aquatic ape hypothesis?

Yes

dv said:

sibeen said:

Has anyone mentioned the aquatic ape hypothesis?

Yes

Paul, is that you, Paul?

party_pants said:

I don’t think this has become the accepted hypothesis yet, because it is going to be very hard to come up with solid proof, given that much of the coastline is now submerged post ice-age.

Fair dos but note that a decent about of evidence has been dredged up about the culture of Doggerland (an area of the North Sea that was finally submerged about 8000 years ago).

dv said:

I think the authors, too, are a bit bold in saying “no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years”.

I agree.

Maybe I didn’t say so very clearly.

dv said:

party_pants said:

I don’t think this has become the accepted hypothesis yet, because it is going to be very hard to come up with solid proof, given that much of the coastline is now submerged post ice-age.

Fair dos but note that a decent about of evidence has been dredged up about the culture of Doggerland (an area of the North Sea that was finally submerged about 8000 years ago).

Yes, there must be a load of evidence in fairly shallow waters, just waiting to be dug up.

But maybe not all that shallow if they stuck to the then coast on their way here.

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

I think the authors, too, are a bit bold in saying “no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years”.

I agree.

Maybe I didn’t say so very clearly.

There is no evidence that other cultures had ground axe edges art all. Whatever your opinion is.

Though of course we don’t know which path was taken by any of the various waves of migration from Sunda to Sahul, two of the easiest routes are indicated in the map below.

1/ via Java, Bali, Lombok, Alor, Timor, Ashmore plateau. The longest sea voyage along that path would be something like 65 km.

2/ via Sulawesi, Taliabu, Buru, Seram, Misool, which would have a longest sea voyage of around 52 km.

Note that New Guinea and Australia were part of the same land mass (Sahul) at such times.

These are relatively calm waters. People swim about those distances in the open water Santa Fe-Coronda Marathon: takes about ten hours.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

I think the authors, too, are a bit bold in saying “no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years”.

I agree.

Maybe I didn’t say so very clearly.

There is no evidence that other cultures had ground axe edges art all. Whatever your opinion is.

It is hardly surprising that Aboriginal people started grinding axes in Australia. There is little flint in Australia and it would have taken a long time for them to find this. There is ample stone that can be ground however.

dv said:

Though of course we don’t know which path was taken by any of the various waves of migration from Sunda to Sahul, two of the easiest routes are indicated in the map below.

1/ via Java, Bali, Lombok, Alor, Timor, Ashmore plateau. The longest sea voyage along that path would be something like 65 km.

2/ via Sulawesi, Taliabu, Buru, Seram, Misool, which would have a longest sea voyage of around 52 km.

Note that New Guinea and Australia were part of the same land mass (Sahul) at such times.

These are relatively calm waters. People swim about those distances in the open water Santa Fe-Coronda Marathon: takes about ten hours.

And here’s the map…

dv said:

Though of course we don’t know which path was taken by any of the various waves of migration from Sunda to Sahul, two of the easiest routes are indicated in the map below.

1/ via Java, Bali, Lombok, Alor, Timor, Ashmore plateau. The longest sea voyage along that path would be something like 65 km.

2/ via Sulawesi, Taliabu, Buru, Seram, Misool, which would have a longest sea voyage of around 52 km.

Note that New Guinea and Australia were part of the same land mass (Sahul) at such times.

These are relatively calm waters. People swim about those distances in the open water Santa Fe-Coronda Marathon: takes about ten hours.

They most likely didn’t swim to Australia because the waters in those times would have had abundant numbers of sharks and crocodiles,

dv said:

dv said:

Though of course we don’t know which path was taken by any of the various waves of migration from Sunda to Sahul, two of the easiest routes are indicated in the map below.

1/ via Java, Bali, Lombok, Alor, Timor, Ashmore plateau. The longest sea voyage along that path would be something like 65 km.

2/ via Sulawesi, Taliabu, Buru, Seram, Misool, which would have a longest sea voyage of around 52 km.

Note that New Guinea and Australia were part of the same land mass (Sahul) at such times.

These are relatively calm waters. People swim about those distances in the open water Santa Fe-Coronda Marathon: takes about ten hours.

And here’s the map…

nice map.

sarahs mum said:

dv said:

dv said:

Though of course we don’t know which path was taken by any of the various waves of migration from Sunda to Sahul, two of the easiest routes are indicated in the map below.

1/ via Java, Bali, Lombok, Alor, Timor, Ashmore plateau. The longest sea voyage along that path would be something like 65 km.

2/ via Sulawesi, Taliabu, Buru, Seram, Misool, which would have a longest sea voyage of around 52 km.

Note that New Guinea and Australia were part of the same land mass (Sahul) at such times.

These are relatively calm waters. People swim about those distances in the open water Santa Fe-Coronda Marathon: takes about ten hours.

And here’s the map…

nice map.

Well I can’t take all the credit…

dv said:

sarahs mum said:

dv said:

And here’s the map…

nice map.

Well I can’t take all the credit…

You got one of those for Bass Strait?

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

I think the authors, too, are a bit bold in saying “no other culture had such axes for another 20,000 years”.

I agree.

Maybe I didn’t say so very clearly.

There is no evidence that other cultures had ground axe edges art all. Whatever your opinion is.

I didn’t say there was any evidence (I’m pretty sure DV didn’t either).

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

I agree.

Maybe I didn’t say so very clearly.

There is no evidence that other cultures had ground axe edges art all. Whatever your opinion is.

I didn’t say there was any evidence (I’m pretty sure DV didn’t either).

Fair enough.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

There is no evidence that other cultures had ground axe edges art all. Whatever your opinion is.

I didn’t say there was any evidence (I’m pretty sure DV didn’t either).

Fair enough.

Indeed, the scarcity of evidence was a key element of my point.

A stone axe is barely a tool

sarahs mum said:

You got one of those for Bass Strait?

No, but I can tell you the Bass Strait was all land at the peak of the ice ages

dv said:

party_pants said:

I don’t think this has become the accepted hypothesis yet, because it is going to be very hard to come up with solid proof, given that much of the coastline is now submerged post ice-age.

Fair dos but note that a decent about of evidence has been dredged up about the culture of Doggerland (an area of the North Sea that was finally submerged about 8000 years ago).

What I meant was that we are unlikely to find any organic remains (like boats or rafts) from 70,000 years ago, even if the lands only became inundated during the last 10,000. We can only go on the odd stone tool found here and there.

I like the coastal migration hypothesis because they could have got pretty much all the around around from east Africa to Indonesia without leaving sight of land. Or without leaving the warmer tropical zone of the Indian Ocean so they did not need the invention of clothing and all that.

dv said:

sarahs mum said:

You got one of those for Bass Strait?

No, but I can tell you the Bass Strait was all land at the peak of the ice ages

the clarke island/cape barren island/ flinders island bit still looks a bit shallow.

party_pants said:

What I meant was that we are unlikely to find any organic remains (like boats or rafts) from 70,000 years ago, even if the lands only became inundated during the last 10,000.

Fair.

sarahs mum said:

dv said:

sarahs mum said:

You got one of those for Bass Strait?

No, but I can tell you the Bass Strait was all land at the peak of the ice ages

the clarke island/cape barren island/ flinders island bit still looks a bit shallow.

Fill it in

Cymek said:

A stone axe is barely a tool

How would you like to be hit on the head by one? Have you ever tied to make one?

dv said:

sarahs mum said:

You got one of those for Bass Strait?

No, but I can tell you the Bass Strait was all land at the peak of the ice ages

Up until about 15 thousand years ago.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

A stone axe is barely a tool

How would you like to be hit on the head by one? Have you ever tied to make one?

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

I don’t know how fast silver leaf ironbark grow but a work for the dole scheme involving cutting them down with a stone axe would not only increase stamina and shoulder and arm muscle mass it could well be environmentally neutral.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

A stone axe is barely a tool

How would you like to be hit on the head by one? Have you ever tied to make one?

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

They didn’t need to.

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t know how fast silver leaf ironbark grow but a work for the dole scheme involving cutting them down with a stone axe would not only increase stamina and shoulder and arm muscle mass it could well be environmentally neutral.

:) When steel axes appeared they were worth at least two wives in trade.

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t know how fast silver leaf ironbark grow but a work for the dole scheme involving cutting them down with a stone axe would not only increase stamina and shoulder and arm muscle mass it could well be environmentally neutral.

I can almost hear all the workers compensation claims coming through on that one.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

How would you like to be hit on the head by one? Have you ever tied to make one?

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

They didn’t need to.

I wonder if the lifestyle worked so well they didn’t need to “progress” past stone age

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

A stone axe is barely a tool

How would you like to be hit on the head by one? Have you ever tied to make one?

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

How would you like to be hit on the head by one? Have you ever tied to make one?

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

It is an inconvenient truth that has been avoided all along.

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

How would you like to be hit on the head by one? Have you ever tied to make one?

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

Didn’t we previously agree they helped wipe out the megafauna and it took the centuries to live in harmony with the environment

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

Didn’t we previously agree they helped wipe out the megafauna and it took the centuries to live in harmony with the environment

There are a few who believe this. Doesn’t mean it is true though.

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

It is an inconvenient truth that has been avoided all along.

You two like to paint them as noble savages that did and do no wrong and modern society is evil even though I bet both of you live as a part of it with modern conveniences. You can’t prove they have always lived in harmony with society you assume so from fragmented information

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

I wouldn’t but its not an overly impressive feat when it comes to tool making and they seemed to stagnate and not go beyond this level for a long time

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

Didn’t we previously agree they helped wipe out the megafauna and it took the centuries to live in harmony with the environment

As it is NOW conclusively known they lived in Australia for something like 25 thousand years WITH the Megafauna, so if they did send them extinct, they certainly took their time about it.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

It is an inconvenient truth that has been avoided all along.

You two like to paint them as noble savages that did and do no wrong and modern society is evil even though I bet both of you live as a part of it with modern conveniences. You can’t prove they have always lived in harmony with society you assume so from fragmented information

I’d prefer if you proved that we are.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

Didn’t we previously agree they helped wipe out the megafauna and it took the centuries to live in harmony with the environment

There are a few who believe this. Doesn’t mean it is true though.

True, but neither is what you say necessarily true either.
We assume about the past from evidence that is centuries or millennia old and it doesn’t make it fact

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

Didn’t we previously agree they helped wipe out the megafauna and it took the centuries to live in harmony with the environment

As it is NOW conclusively known they lived in Australia for something like 25 thousand years WITH the Megafauna, so if they did send them extinct, they certainly took their time about it.

Megafauna died out everywhere else too.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

Didn’t we previously agree they helped wipe out the megafauna and it took the centuries to live in harmony with the environment

There are a few who believe this. Doesn’t mean it is true though.

True, but neither is what you say necessarily true either.
We assume about the past from evidence that is centuries or millennia old and it doesn’t make it fact

I’ve seen faked artifacts. Done by modern man with modern tools but real artifacts are evidence in themselves.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

It is an inconvenient truth that has been avoided all along.

You two like to paint them as noble savages that did and do no wrong and modern society is evil even though I bet both of you live as a part of it with modern conveniences. You can’t prove they have always lived in harmony with society you assume so from fragmented information

I’d prefer if you proved that we are.

What noble ?
Some modern humans are, but most are non committed or apathetic and quite a few are evil as they come and we should strive to do a lot better but don’t

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

Look, these people lived well for tens of thousands of years on this continent and learnt to live with it for the betterment of the biota, THAT is a very big achievement. Whilst we grab everything we can regardless of the environment to the extent that we are now heading for the sixth mass extinction event. THAT is not intelligent, that is not cleaver, it is just greed and the whole world is paying for it. So it was not very smart to go much above the level you seem so scornful.

It is an inconvenient truth that has been avoided all along.

You two like to paint them as noble savages that did and do no wrong and modern society is evil even though I bet both of you live as a part of it with modern conveniences. You can’t prove they have always lived in harmony with society you assume so from fragmented information

They have the figures on the board, we don’t not by a very long way. What is it you don’t understand about the planet heading for the sixth mass extinction? The way they lived their lives were sustainable, ours are not!

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

You two like to paint them as noble savages that did and do no wrong and modern society is evil even though I bet both of you live as a part of it with modern conveniences. You can’t prove they have always lived in harmony with society you assume so from fragmented information

I’d prefer if you proved that we are.

What noble ?
Some modern humans are, but most are non committed or apathetic and quite a few are evil as they come and we should strive to do a lot better but don’t

You see?

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

There are a few who believe this. Doesn’t mean it is true though.

True, but neither is what you say necessarily true either.
We assume about the past from evidence that is centuries or millennia old and it doesn’t make it fact

I’ve seen faked artifacts. Done by modern man with modern tools but real artifacts are evidence in themselves.

Not fakes, but it’s not easy to extrapolate about the past from nothing but old relics .
All I’m saying is Aboriginals may exploited the environment for a long time but saw it was damaging and stopped, something we are slowly learning but because we are everywhere and so many might not do it in time

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

True, but neither is what you say necessarily true either.
We assume about the past from evidence that is centuries or millennia old and it doesn’t make it fact

I’ve seen faked artifacts. Done by modern man with modern tools but real artifacts are evidence in themselves.

Not fakes, but it’s not easy to extrapolate about the past from nothing but old relics .
All I’m saying is Aboriginals may exploited the environment for a long time but saw it was damaging and stopped, something we are slowly learning but because we are everywhere and so many might not do it in time

Sings, The fool on the Hill.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

I’d prefer if you proved that we are.

What noble ?
Some modern humans are, but most are non committed or apathetic and quite a few are evil as they come and we should strive to do a lot better but don’t

You see?

Yes but I don’t blame science or technology I blame people who are short sighted and selfish.
We haven’t really progressed socially/emotionally at all just technology and knowledge which outstrips out maturity to use it properly.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

What noble ?
Some modern humans are, but most are non committed or apathetic and quite a few are evil as they come and we should strive to do a lot better but don’t

You see?

Yes but I don’t blame science or technology I blame people who are short sighted and selfish.
We haven’t really progressed socially/emotionally at all just technology and knowledge which outstrips out maturity to use it properly.

The thing about science is that it happens after the fact.

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

True, but neither is what you say necessarily true either.
We assume about the past from evidence that is centuries or millennia old and it doesn’t make it fact

I’ve seen faked artifacts. Done by modern man with modern tools but real artifacts are evidence in themselves.

Not fakes, but it’s not easy to extrapolate about the past from nothing but old relics .
All I’m saying is Aboriginals may exploited the environment for a long time but saw it was damaging and stopped, something we are slowly learning but because we are everywhere and so many might not do it in time

It is purely they way we live, our population size and our greed which knows no bounds makes our way of life unsustainable. We fucked up when we became farmers and unfortunately now the is no way back. So enjoy yourself on the spoils of today’s civilised man, as it will be your children who must pay for it.

roughbarked said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

You see?

Yes but I don’t blame science or technology I blame people who are short sighted and selfish.
We haven’t really progressed socially/emotionally at all just technology and knowledge which outstrips out maturity to use it properly.

The thing about science is that it happens after the fact.

Yes but many people call some science evil but its not, it’s just how the universe works and it’s how we use it that good or evil.
What is wrong is learning its bad and then continue with it, that’s a crime against all of humanity

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

I’ve seen faked artifacts. Done by modern man with modern tools but real artifacts are evidence in themselves.

Not fakes, but it’s not easy to extrapolate about the past from nothing but old relics .
All I’m saying is Aboriginals may exploited the environment for a long time but saw it was damaging and stopped, something we are slowly learning but because we are everywhere and so many might not do it in time

It is purely they way we live, our population size and our greed which knows no bounds makes our way of life unsustainable. We fucked up when we became farmers and unfortunately now the is no way back. So enjoy yourself on the spoils of today’s civilised man, as it will be your children who must pay for it.

I don’t think like that and try to minimise my impact but you can only do such much and still actually exist
We do have a way back but the cost is too high for most, for example if the human race was serious we’d agree (ha ha not likely) to divert all money spent on weapons to fixing the environment, close down unsustainable industries, stop eating meat and try to use lab grown stuff instead and so. It would be a multi generational project that all governments support

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

Not fakes, but it’s not easy to extrapolate about the past from nothing but old relics .
All I’m saying is Aboriginals may exploited the environment for a long time but saw it was damaging and stopped, something we are slowly learning but because we are everywhere and so many might not do it in time

It is purely they way we live, our population size and our greed which knows no bounds makes our way of life unsustainable. We fucked up when we became farmers and unfortunately now the is no way back. So enjoy yourself on the spoils of today’s civilised man, as it will be your children who must pay for it.

I don’t think like that and try to minimise my impact but you can only do such much and still actually exist
We do have a way back but the cost is too high for most, for example if the human race was serious we’d agree (ha ha not likely) to divert all money spent on weapons to fixing the environment, close down unsustainable industries, stop eating meat and try to use lab grown stuff instead and so. It would be a multi generational project that all governments support

There is NO WAY BACK unless you kill off 99% of the human population and even then the problem will likely reoccur sometime in the future.

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

PermeateFree said:

It is purely they way we live, our population size and our greed which knows no bounds makes our way of life unsustainable. We fucked up when we became farmers and unfortunately now the is no way back. So enjoy yourself on the spoils of today’s civilised man, as it will be your children who must pay for it.

I don’t think like that and try to minimise my impact but you can only do such much and still actually exist
We do have a way back but the cost is too high for most, for example if the human race was serious we’d agree (ha ha not likely) to divert all money spent on weapons to fixing the environment, close down unsustainable industries, stop eating meat and try to use lab grown stuff instead and so. It would be a multi generational project that all governments support

There is NO WAY BACK unless you kill off 99% of the human population and even then the problem will likely reoccur sometime in the future.

I mean…

Ian said:

I mean…

Well, at least the wardrobe department has an easy time of it.

Ian said:

TFIF

Ian said:

Ian said:

TFIF

PermeateFree said:

Ian said:

Ian said:

TFIF

Well, now, who hasn’t seen those in the local Coles?

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t know how fast silver leaf ironbark grow but a work for the dole scheme involving cutting them down with a stone axe would not only increase stamina and shoulder and arm muscle mass it could well be environmentally neutral.

Mmm, eradication of native species should not be high on the agenda

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t know how fast silver leaf ironbark grow but a work for the dole scheme involving cutting them down with a stone axe would not only increase stamina and shoulder and arm muscle mass it could well be environmentally neutral.

Mmm, eradication of native species should not be high on the agenda

Plays and misses, taken by the keeper.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/emu-hit-run-driver-charged-with-animal-cruelty/10292412

Cristos. The untrammelled stupidity.

sibeen said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/emu-hit-run-driver-charged-with-animal-cruelty/10292412

Cristos. The untrammelled stupidity.

…and gets it in the wrong thread too boot.

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t know how fast silver leaf ironbark grow but a work for the dole scheme involving cutting them down with a stone axe would not only increase stamina and shoulder and arm muscle mass it could well be environmentally neutral.

Mmm, eradication of native species should not be high on the agenda

I doubt the Aborigine did any of that.

sibeen said:

sibeen said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/emu-hit-run-driver-charged-with-animal-cruelty/10292412

Cristos. The untrammelled stupidity.

…and gets it in the wrong thread too boot.

Oh I reckon it i probably is in the right thread the way it is going.

sibeen said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/emu-hit-run-driver-charged-with-animal-cruelty/10292412

Cristos. The untrammelled stupidity.

Awful humans in Australia.

sarahs mum said:

sibeen said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/emu-hit-run-driver-charged-with-animal-cruelty/10292412

Cristos. The untrammelled stupidity.

Awful humans in Australia.

Tends to be humans from any country, not just here.

poikilotherm said:

sarahs mum said:

sibeen said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-21/emu-hit-run-driver-charged-with-animal-cruelty/10292412

Cristos. The untrammelled stupidity.

Awful humans in Australia.

Tends to be humans from any country, not just here.

yes.

roughbarked said:

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I don’t know how fast silver leaf ironbark grow but a work for the dole scheme involving cutting them down with a stone axe would not only increase stamina and shoulder and arm muscle mass it could well be environmentally neutral.

Mmm, eradication of native species should not be high on the agenda

I doubt the Aborigine did any of that.

From that National Geographic link…

However humans reached Australia, their arrival triggered dramatic and permanent changes to the continent’s landscape and its wildlife. Roughly 60 species of the continent’s large mammals and birds became extinct around 45,000 to 50,000 years ago as a result of massive fires that were likely set by early humans. The purpose of the fires is unknown, but they may have been used to clear land, to signal other tribes, or to flush out game during hunts.

What is clear is that those early man-made fires altered the Australian landscape forever, transforming it from one covered by drought-adapted forests and shrubs to the fire-resistant plants that dominate today. Early humans may also have played a decisive role in driving some of Australia’s large land animals—including giant kangaroos and marsupial lions, as well as giant birds and reptiles—to extinction through over hunting.

Ian said:

roughbarked said:

dv said:

Mmm, eradication of native species should not be high on the agenda

I doubt the Aborigine did any of that.

From that National Geographic link…

However humans reached Australia, their arrival triggered dramatic and permanent changes to the continent’s landscape and its wildlife. Roughly 60 species of the continent’s large mammals and birds became extinct around 45,000 to 50,000 years ago as a result of massive fires that were likely set by early humans. The purpose of the fires is unknown, but they may have been used to clear land, to signal other tribes, or to flush out game during hunts.

What is clear is that those early man-made fires altered the Australian landscape forever, transforming it from one covered by drought-adapted forests and shrubs to the fire-resistant plants that dominate today. Early humans may also have played a decisive role in driving some of Australia’s large land animals—including giant kangaroos and marsupial lions, as well as giant birds and reptiles—to extinction through over hunting.

All true, but drought-adapted forest would also burn especially when fuel loads have only been reduced by grazing, so Aborigines were not the only igniter of bushfires, lightning did and still does a great job. As such there were plenty of fire adaptive species that would not be greatly affected, and owing to vegetation type, many fires would not run far due the open habitat. But is not to say there would have been some that did change the environment or at least managed it to improve the green pick (attract prey animals), ease of movement and the reduction of the fuel load, which would likely have reduced the intensity of fires considerably. So not all bad.

The flora and environment today is NOT what it was when managed by the Aborigines, they did NOT create the overgrown situation we have today, where small shrubs, annuals and ephemerals are smothered by larger vegetation, which reduce the number of invertebrates that feed from them, that in turn affects the survival of the mammals and birds that feed upon them. Extinctions have occurred when Aboriginals were removed from their land and placed into missions, denying them the need to look after country, of which burning off is a most important component.

I think it is now the second time you have ignored the fact that Aborigines have been recorded as being in Australia for at least 65,000 years (we have only been here for 230 years). Therefore even if we take the 45,000 to 50,000 years of many of the megafaunas extinction (many experts would have this time closer to 40,000 years). So the Aborigines and the megafauna co-existed in Australia for at least 15 – 20,000 years, therefore the figures you quote no longer match as they once did, and consequently are in need of a rethink.

Ah, the DJT gambit.

Idiot

Ian said:

roughbarked said:

dv said:

Mmm, eradication of native species should not be high on the agenda

I doubt the Aborigine did any of that.

From that National Geographic link…

However humans reached Australia, their arrival triggered dramatic and permanent changes to the continent’s landscape and its wildlife. Roughly 60 species of the continent’s large mammals and birds became extinct around 45,000 to 50,000 years ago as a result of massive fires that were likely set by early humans. The purpose of the fires is unknown, but they may have been used to clear land, to signal other tribes, or to flush out game during hunts.

What is clear is that those early man-made fires altered the Australian landscape forever, transforming it from one covered by drought-adapted forests and shrubs to the fire-resistant plants that dominate today. Early humans may also have played a decisive role in driving some of Australia’s large land animals—including giant kangaroos and marsupial lions, as well as giant birds and reptiles—to extinction through over hunting.

I’m not so surer that this is as accurate as is believed. The Australian continent was drying out and has been for far longer than Aboriginal people have been here.

Ian said:

Ah, the DJT gambit.

Idiot

I have been studying this sort of thing for several decades now, but you always get the armchair expert who thinks he knows better. Don’t let me stop you with your illusion, I was only trying to educate, but sometime you just cannot get through.

PermeateFree said:

Ian said:

Ah, the DJT gambit.

Idiot

I have been studying this sort of thing for several decades now, but you always get the armchair expert who thinks he knows better. Don’t let me stop you with your illusion, I was only trying to educate, but sometime you just cannot get through.

What are you if not an armchair expert? You have no formal qualifications yet you expect people to take you at your word. You could at least reference some academics when you parrot their work.

Witty Rejoinder said:

PermeateFree said:

Ian said:

Ah, the DJT gambit.

Idiot

I have been studying this sort of thing for several decades now, but you always get the armchair expert who thinks he knows better. Don’t let me stop you with your illusion, I was only trying to educate, but sometime you just cannot get through.

What are you if not an armchair expert? You have no formal qualifications yet you expect people to take you at your word. You could at least reference some academics when you parrot their work.

Nice to hear from you Witty the forum Aboriginal when not being an Aboriginal, pity you are ashamed of your background, they have much to offer, yet you prefer to follow the greedy and the know it alls. Your life I suppose. Anyway, how would you know of anything of my background and qualifications? Another armchair expert assumption regardless of fact. Please do tell!

PermeateFree said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

PermeateFree said:

I have been studying this sort of thing for several decades now, but you always get the armchair expert who thinks he knows better. Don’t let me stop you with your illusion, I was only trying to educate, but sometime you just cannot get through.

What are you if not an armchair expert? You have no formal qualifications yet you expect people to take you at your word. You could at least reference some academics when you parrot their work.

Nice to hear from you Witty the forum Aboriginal when not being an Aboriginal, pity you are ashamed of your background, they have much to offer, yet you prefer to follow the greedy and the know it alls. Your life I suppose. Anyway, how would you know of anything of my background and qualifications? Another armchair expert assumption regardless of fact. Please do tell!

You seem a little unhinged today.

Witty Rejoinder said:

PermeateFree said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

What are you if not an armchair expert? You have no formal qualifications yet you expect people to take you at your word. You could at least reference some academics when you parrot their work.

Nice to hear from you Witty the forum Aboriginal when not being an Aboriginal, pity you are ashamed of your background, they have much to offer, yet you prefer to follow the greedy and the know it alls. Your life I suppose. Anyway, how would you know of anything of my background and qualifications? Another armchair expert assumption regardless of fact. Please do tell!

You seem a little unhinged today.

No, the problem with some people in this forum is they cannot abide having their pet theories corrected. Get a life Witty, there is a lot more out there than you will find in here.

PermeateFree said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

PermeateFree said:

Nice to hear from you Witty the forum Aboriginal when not being an Aboriginal, pity you are ashamed of your background, they have much to offer, yet you prefer to follow the greedy and the know it alls. Your life I suppose. Anyway, how would you know of anything of my background and qualifications? Another armchair expert assumption regardless of fact. Please do tell!

You seem a little unhinged today.

No, the problem with some people in this forum is they cannot abide having their pet theories corrected.

that’s also true of many academics

One of my arty friends and her hubby were helicoptered onto Maatsuyker Island to day. They will be the caretakers for the six months.

sarahs mum said:

One of my arty friends and her hubby were helicoptered onto Maatsuyker Island to day. They will be the caretakers for the six months.

Wrong thread. oh well.

sarahs mum said:

sarahs mum said:

One of my arty friends and her hubby were helicoptered onto Maatsuyker Island to day. They will be the caretakers for the six months.

Wrong thread. oh well.

What do they have a driveway for if there are no roads in or out?

dv said:

dv said:

Though of course we don’t know which path was taken by any of the various waves of migration from Sunda to Sahul, two of the easiest routes are indicated in the map below.

1/ via Java, Bali, Lombok, Alor, Timor, Ashmore plateau. The longest sea voyage along that path would be something like 65 km.

2/ via Sulawesi, Taliabu, Buru, Seram, Misool, which would have a longest sea voyage of around 52 km.

Note that New Guinea and Australia were part of the same land mass (Sahul) at such times.

These are relatively calm waters. People swim about those distances in the open water Santa Fe-Coronda Marathon: takes about ten hours.

And here’s the map… img src=”/uploads/efd4f3ad-c236-4125-a40a-d57aec9f0869.jpe”

I love the map. Is it on the web anywhere else? Ah yes.

https://www.deviantart.com/atlas-v7x/art/Coastlines-of-the-Ice-Age-Sundaland-685023839

This map shows how the terrain may have appeared during the Last Glacial Maximum, around 21,000 years ago, when sea levels were approximately 125 meters (410 feet) below present. This map does not include any lakes of this time period. The colouring of the map is based on height, and is not meant to represent the climate or vegetation in any way. You can find the elevation key as a separate image here. This map also does not account for any geological or tectonic changes in the landscape since this time period, as the map was made using a modern terrain map with a lowered sea level to simulate an approximate representation of the ice age coastlines.