[meteorite-list] Heidelbergensis-Zhamanshin dates

From: Andreas Gren <info_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:42:24 +0100
Message-ID: <U06a73jAJA7CeO.RZmta_at_mo-p07-ob.rzone.de>

Hi E.P.,

thats interesting, in your book you write Homo heidelbergensis (thanks
Michale for pointing us to the right spelling)was split in two, now you try
to tell me that Homo heidelbergensis is not so clear defined. So why than
use the term Homo heidelbergensis?

And if its an own species or not may be cleared in future, I go after what
is the actual point of science , and there exist the term Homo
heidelbergensis with a clear defined range of age.

Every field of science is under permanent discussion, but it also exist a
point of agreement what is actual. And you ignore this. May be sometime
there will be a H8 Meteorite, but it's not the time for a book about H8
meteorites.

You wrote :
You must remember
that just because no earlier Heidelbergensis has been
found, that does not mean that an earlier date did not
occur.
Yes, they didn't fall from sky, but its obviously you try to stretch the
time how you need it. You could also argue they are still alive, just no
later artefacts have been found and not all areas of the earth are
discovered now.

You wrote
The important point here is that regardless of
taxonomy, erectus or heidelbergensis .....

Oh! Not so important anymore or already the same?

You wrote
As a bonus consolation to you, there are mistakes in
my book,...

How generous, and please don't forget this was just one example, I would
find much more, be sure, it's obviously you are Impact fixed and for
everything what happened on earth you try to find an impact.

You wrote
You might find this hard to believe, but some people
think my book is a great book.
No ,it's easy to believe, you will always find some people who believes
everything what is printed.

You wrote
My offer to you stands, donate your copy
to a university, send me the letter, and I'll send you
what you paid.
For sure I will not do, they would laugh at me loudly what a kind of
donation that should be. And I'm not interesting to spread your ideas about
everywhere, anytime an impact, which are built on so thin ice like your Homo
heidelbergensis split in two theory.

So what shell I think over an author who first try to defend his Theory and
after it's obviously that there something fit not together, starts to soften
the terms he used, turn in a discussion about taxonomy and stretch the time
how he need it?

Andi


-------------------------------------------------
Meteoritenhaus
info at meteoritenhaus.de
Inhaber Andreas Gren
Stapelfelder Str. 58
22143 Hamburg
Germany
phone
0049(0)40-67593737
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikations-Nummer: folgt
Steuernummer:08/453/07598
-------------------------------------------------
-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces at meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von E.P.
Grondine
Gesendet: Montag, 19. November 2007 04:23
An: Andreas Gren; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Heidelbergensis-Zhamanshin dates

Andi -

Yes, Andi, time runs in one direction.

One problem is in taxonomy, as I point out in footnote
22:

"While some would lump Homo heidelbergensis with
erectus, my intent here is solely to point out certain
catastrophes which most certainly affected the
evolution of modern man. Although this is another area
under intense study and debate, my guess is that all
erectus descendants were still able to interbreed by
this time, and likely continued to be able to do so
for some time afterwards."

Another problem lies with samples. You must remember
that just because no earlier Heidelbergensis has been
found, that does not mean that an earlier date did not
occur. Excavations in China and Russia, including
especially the coastal areas, have been "limited" in
recent decades. H.'s documented range, if you accept
that Heidelbergensis was distinct from Erectus,
indicates an earlier time.

The important point here is that regardless of
taxonomy, erectus or heidelbergensis, man is around
and hunting probiscidonts (ancient elephants - hope I
spelled that right) with spears at the time of the
Zhamanshinite impact, and that massive impact occurs
in the middle of his range.

As a bonus consolation to you, there are mistakes in
my book, and I find them irritating. Some are due to
what was known at the time. In particular I used an
end paleo date (8,350 BCE) for the holocene start
impacts, now known at 10,900 BCE.

The 8,350 BCE discontinuity most likely reflects yet
another impact. Also, information on Savanah River
ethnography has only recently become available.

There are several other errors, but one that really
irritates me is that the term "Nodena" was redefined
by the anthropologists to apply to another type of
pottery rather than the sandy fabric ware I was
seeking to note.

I tried to make my book as easy to understand as I
could, but it is not for everyone. It would have been
nice to have had an editorial staff, and graphics arts
dept, and distributor. I didn't have those. It also
would have helped if I had not had a stroke, and a
pack of insane people to deal with - but I did. I just
hope I didn't blow the scaling laws too bad.

You might find this hard to believe, but some people
think my book is a great book. I'm sorry you're not
one of them. My offer to you stands, donate your copy
to a university, send me the letter, and I'll send you
what you paid.

You know, there was a lot of material about Native
Americas and meteorites that I wanted to write up, but
instead we had that big discussion about Hibben.

Right now, I feel like the book is going to do very
well, right after it kills me.

E.P. Grondine
Man and Impact in the Americas

--- Andreas Gren <info at meteoritenhaus.de> wrote:

> Hi E.P.
>
> So you agree Zhamanshinite is around 900 000 years
> old,at the actual point of science.
>
> And Hidelbergensis is 500 000 -600 000 years old,
> also at the actual point of science. If you like,
count Homo antecessor to Heidelbergensis, so you
> would reach maximum age for Heidelbergensis of 800
> 000 years, still 100 000 years after the
Zhamanshinite event.
>
> So how can a species be split, that not exist at the
> time of the event?.
>
> Time is going just in one direction.
>
> Andi



 
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Be a better pen pal.
Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.
http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Mon 19 Nov 2007 05:42:24 AM PST