https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
Published: 10 September 2019

Abstract
Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
lifeways.

Primum Sapienti wrote:

[...]

As was just stated in that other thread on the topic, this type of testing sucks
eggs through a hose. It's really, Really, REALLY bad.

Oh. That means it's the opposite of accurate.

For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
trans Atlantic trade.

Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.

-- --

https://uapro.tumblr.com/post/673320174831747072/

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 3:59:20 PM UTC-5, Primum Sapienti wrote:
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
> Published: 10 September 2019
>
> Abstract
> Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
> cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
> produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
> appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
> survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
> by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
> products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
> to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
> use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
> the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
> the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
> alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
> technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
> and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
> lifeways.

Small flakes = ultra-thin slicing of meat to cure in sun allowed UV to kill parasites

DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

> Small flakes = ultra-thin slicing of meat to cure in sun allowed UV to kill parasites

Here:

https://rumble.com/vqwxtc-the-worst-of-watch-this-volume-ii.html

I used to do a public access cable show. As you can see, it has about as much
relevance to paleo anthropology as any of your posts, which is why I figured you'd
like it.

It was actually a movie review show -- film reviews -- though you may have trouble
guessing that from the clip.

At one point it was decided that we could scratch "Movies" and just do "Reviews,"
be them music, products or ANYTHING. Maybe I could reboot it for Youtube,
do a "Review" of internet trolls...

-- --

https://rumble.com/vqwxtc-the-worst-of-watch-this-volume-ii.html

On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 3:32:52 PM UTC-5, I Envy JTEM wrote:
> DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
>
> > Small flakes = ultra-thin slicing of meat to cure in sun allowed UV to kill parasites
> Here:
>
> https://rumble.com/vqwxtc-the-worst-of-watch-this-volume-ii.html
>
> I used to do a public access cable show. As you can see, it has about as much
> relevance to paleo anthropology as any of your posts, which is why I figured you'd
> like it.
>
> It was actually a movie review show -- film reviews -- though you may have trouble
> guessing that from the clip.
>
> At one point it was decided that we could scratch "Movies" and just do "Reviews,"
> be them music, products or ANYTHING. Maybe I could reboot it for Youtube,
> do a "Review" of internet trolls...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://rumble.com/vqwxtc-the-worst-of-watch-this-volume-ii.html

I guess those sharp flakes could be used to shave the Jerm's hairy tongue as well.

The site being coastal and all...

> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8

"thousands of butchered animal bones were also retrieved from the site, including those of elephants"
:-D
Never heard of fossilization processes??
Do they really believe H.erectus ran elephants to exhaustion?? :-DDD

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> Do they really believe H.erectus ran elephants to exhaustion?? :-DDD

Yes they do.

And we know humans eat meat, so what are they pretending to have found?

-- --

https://rumble.com/vqwxtc-the-worst-of-watch-this-volume-ii.html

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
>
> "thousands of butchered animal bones were also retrieved from the site, including those of elephants"
> :-D
> Never heard of fossilization processes??
> Do they really believe H.erectus ran elephants to exhaustion?? :-DDD
>

"we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process"

No snorkel noses needed.

> No snorkel noses needed.

OI, BIG NOSE !
New Scientist 2782 p 69 Lastword 16 October 2010

Why do humans evolve external noses that don’t seem to serve any useful purpose – our smelling sensors are inside the head. Our nose is vulnerable to damage, and the majority of primates and other mammals manage with relatively flat faces. Traditional explanations are that the nose protects against dry air, hot air, cold air, dusty air, whatever air, but most savannah mammals have no external noses, and polar animals such as arctic foxes or hares tend to evolve shorter extremities including flatter noses (Allen’s Rule), not larger as the Neanderthal protruding nose.
The answer isn’t so difficult if we simply consider humans like other mammals.
An external nose is seen in elephant seals, hooded seals, tapirs, elephants, swine and, among primates, in the mangrove-dwelling proboscis monkeys. Various, often mutually compatible functions, have been proposed, such as sexual display (in male hooded and elephant seals or proboscis monkeys), manipulation of food (in elephants, tapirs and swine), a snorkel (elephants, proboscis monkeys) and as a nose-closing aid during diving (in most of these animals). These mammals spend a lot of time at the margins of land and water.. Possible functions of an external nose in creatures evolving into aquatic ones are obvious and match those listed above in many cases. They can initially act as a nose closure, a snorkel, to keep water out, to dig in wet soil for food, and so on. Afterwards, these external noses can also become co-opted for other functions, such as sexual display (visual as well as auditory) in hooded and elephant seals and proboscis monkeys.
But what does this have to do with human evolution?
The earliest known Homo fossils outside Africa – such as those at Mojokerto in Java and Dmanisi in Georgia – are about 1.8 million years old. The easiest way for them to have spread to other continents, and to islands such as Java, is along the coasts, and from there inland along rivers. During the glacial periods of the Pleistocene – the ice age cycles that ran from about 1.8 million to 12,000 years ago – most coasts were about 100 metres below the present-day sea level, so we don’t know whether or when Homo populations lived there. But coasts and riversides are full of shellfish and other foods that are easily collected and digested by smart, handy and tool-using “apes”, and are rich in potential brain-boosting nutrients such as docosahexaenoic acid (DHA).
If Pleistocene Homo spread along the coasts, beachcombing, wading and diving for seafoods as Polynesian islanders still do, this could explain why Homo erectus evolved larger brains (aided by DHA) and larger noses (because of their part-time diving). This littoral intermezzo could help to explain not only why we like to have our holidays at tropical beaches, eating shrimps and coconuts, but also why we became fat and furless bipeds with long legs, large brains and big noses.

& flat feet

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> As was just stated in that other thread on the topic, this type of testing sucks
> eggs through a hose. It's really, Really, REALLY bad.
>
> Oh. That means it's the opposite of accurate.
>
> For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> trans Atlantic trade.
>
> Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.

You simply declaring it doesn't make it so.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
Published: 10 September 2019

Abstract
Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
lifeways.

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> No snorkel noses needed.

OI, BIG PENIS!

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/2/eaaq0250.full
Nasalization by Nasalis larvatus: Larger noses audiovisually advertise
conspecifics in proboscis monkeys
Science Advances 21 Feb 2018:

Abstract
Male proboscis monkeys have uniquely enlarged noses that are prominent
adornments, which may have evolved through their sexually competitive
harem group social system. Nevertheless, the ecological roles of the
signals encoded by enlarged noses remain unclear. We found significant
correlations among nose, body, and testis sizes and a clear link between
nose size and number of harem females. Therefore, there is evidence
supporting both male-male competition and female choice as causal factors
in the evolution of enlarged male noses. We also observed that nasal
enlargement systematically modifies the resonance properties of male
vocalizations, which probably encode male quality. Our results indicate
that the audiovisual contributions of enlarged male noses serve as
advertisements to females in their mate selection. This is the first
primate research to evaluate the evolutionary processes involved in
linking morphology, acoustics, and socioecology with unique masculine
characteristics.

https://www.menshealth.com/uk/sex/a36339905/bigger-penis-large-noses/
Men With Larger Noses Have Bigger Penises, According to New Study
Your beak may be giving away more than you think

BY MEN'S HEALTH 05/05/2021
Published in the medical journal Basic and Clinical Andrology, the
researchers of the study found that men with larger noses had a ‘stretched
penile length’ of at least 5.3 inches, while men with smaller noses had a
penis length of 4.1 inches erect.

The team of researchers drew this conclusion by looking at the dead corpses of
126 men within three days of death and measured different parts of their body.
After taking into account varying factors such height, weight and measurements
of the penis (there were no links between feet size and appendage size, before
you ask), the authors of the study then worked out the "stretched penile
length" (SPL) of each cadaver. This was measured by, and sorry to be so
graphic,
by pulling the penis up as far as it would go. Hopefully they used gloves.

https://bacandrology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12610-021-00121-z
Nose size indicates maximum penile length

Abstract
Background
In a previous report, we investigated whether the size of male genitalia
similarly exposed to serum testosterone during aging could change with age
and found
that penile length almost stopped increasing during adolescence and decreased
in older males. In this report, to determine what factors other than age
are related to penile length, we performed a multivariate analysis of the
relationships between stretched penile length (SPL) and other measurements
of genital organs, nose size, height and body weight in 126 adults in
their 30s–50s.

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> I Envy JTEM wrote:

> > For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> > mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> > depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> > trans Atlantic trade.
> >
> > Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.

> You simply declaring

If you weren't a moron, and if you had any reading comprehension, you might've
noticed that I did not simply declare anything. I cited an example. An actual
example were testing on samples maybe 1-10th as old were atrociously
inaccurate.

But, like I said, you'd have to not be a moron, and you'd need some reading
comprehension, to have not made a fool of yourself like you just did.

Kisses.

-- --

https://rumble.com/vr5fsv-confessions-of-an-ex-hippie.html

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 2:04:41 AM UTC-5, I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
> > I Envy JTEM wrote:
>
> > > For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> > > mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> > > depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> > > trans Atlantic trade.
> > >
> > > Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.
>
> > You simply declaring
> If you weren't a moron, and if you had any reading comprehension, you might've
> noticed that I did not simply declare anything. I cited an example. An actual
> example were testing on samples maybe 1-10th as old were atrociously
> inaccurate.
>
> But, like I said, you'd have to not be a moron, and you'd need some reading
> comprehension, to have not made a fool of yourself like you just did.
>
> Kisses.

(The Jerm kisses himself on the lips.)

>
> -- --
>
> https://rumble.com/vr5fsv-confessions-of-an-ex-hippie.html

DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

> I Envy JTEM wrote:
> > But, like I said, you'd have to not be a moron, and you'd need some reading
> > comprehension, to have not made a fool of yourself like you just did.

> (The

I Envy JTEM
Jan 30, 2022, 2:04:41 AM (23 hours ago)



to
Primum Sapienti wrote:

> I Envy JTEM wrote:

> > For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> > mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> > depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> > trans Atlantic trade.
> >
> > Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.

> You simply declaring
If you weren't a moron, and if you had any reading comprehension, you might've
noticed that I did not simply declare anything. I cited an example. An actual
example were testing on samples maybe 1-10th as old were atrociously
inaccurate.
But, like I said, you'd have to not be a moron, and you'd need some reading
comprehension, to have not made a fool of yourself like you just did.

-- --

https://rumble.com/vr5fsv-confessions-of-an-ex-hippie.html

On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 1:23:41 AM UTC-5, I Envy JTEM wrote:
> DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
>
> > I Envy JTEM wrote:
> > > But, like I said, you'd have to not be a moron, and you'd need some reading
> > > comprehension, to have not made a fool of yourself like you just did.
> > (The
>
>
> I Envy JTEM
> Jan 30, 2022, 2:04:41 AM (23 hours ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
> > I Envy JTEM wrote:
>
> > > For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> > > mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> > > depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> > > trans Atlantic trade.
> > >
> > > Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.
>
> > You simply declaring
>
> If you weren't a moron, and if you had any reading comprehension, you might've
> noticed that I did not simply declare anything. I cited an example. An actual
> example were testing on samples maybe 1-10th as old were atrociously
> inaccurate.
>
> But, like I said, you'd have to not be a moron, and you'd need some reading
> comprehension, to have not made a fool of yourself like you just did.
> -- --
>
> https://rumble.com/vr5fsv-confessions-of-an-ex-hippie.html

Skipping the Jerm's gibberish...

Pygmies slit the stems of large broad-leaves and clothespin them to the wicker frame of their dome huts. Ancient Homo did the same with their domeshield, and used the same slit & pin method to hang and cure ultra-thin meat slices at streamside (sunnier there than under the forest canopy) before fire was domesticated. Killing a boar or sow required a strong sharp spear, the hunters stood behind shields next to trees, if charged they climbed 2' up the tree, safe since the boar couldn't raise it's head, unlike a bull or stag. (Russians do this, they cling to tree trunks just above the ground, no need to climb higher.)

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> I Envy JTEM wrote:
>
>>> For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
>>> mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
>>> depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
>>> trans Atlantic trade.
>>>
>>> Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.
>
>> You simply declaring
>
> If you weren't a moron, and if you had any reading comprehension, you might've
> noticed that I did not simply declare anything. I cited an example. An actual

"The testing sucks"

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> As was just stated in that other thread on the topic, this type of
testing sucks
> eggs through a hose. It's really, Really, REALLY bad.
>
> Oh. That means it's the opposite of accurate.
>
> For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> trans Atlantic trade.
>
> Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.

You simply declaring it doesn't make it so.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
Published: 10 September 2019

Abstract
Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
lifeways.

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 3:59:20 PM UTC-5, Primum Sapienti wrote:
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
> Published: 10 September 2019
>
> Abstract
> Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
> cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
> produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
> appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
> survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
> by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
> products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
> to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
> use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
> the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
> the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
> alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
> technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
> and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
> lifeways.

-

Recycling of flint into small sharp flakes in Levant

Flint recycling habit in Homo

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-early-humans-deliberately-recycled-flint.html

On Monday, February 21, 2022 at 5:03:21 PM UTC-5, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 3:59:20 PM UTC-5, Primum Sapienti wrote:
> > https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
> > Published: 10 September 2019
> >
> > Abstract
> > Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
> > cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
> > produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
> > appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
> > survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
> > by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
> > products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
> > to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
> > use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
> > the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
> > the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
> > alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
> > technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
> > and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
> > lifeways.
> -
>
> Recycling of flint into small sharp flakes in Levant
>
> Flint recycling habit in Homo
>
> https://phys.org/news/2019-05-early-humans-deliberately-recycled-flint.html

Revadim site, coastal Israel, sand deposit holds giant elephant tusk:
https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/2022-08-31/ty-article/giant-500-000-year-old-elephant-tusk-found-in-southern-israel/00000182-f2e6-d248-afde-feeea08f0000

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> You simply declaring it doesn't make it so.

And if you had reading comprehension & retention you'd know that I didn't
simply declare. I raised the very real example of cocaine & tobacco on
ancient Egyptian mummies which are only about a tenth as old, so one
might presume the testing to be slightly less problematic.

Now chew your cud. Thanks in advance.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/694054825022930944

On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 1:21:07 PM UTC-4, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
> > You simply declaring it doesn't make it so.
> And if you had reading comprehension & retention you'd know that I didn't
> simply declare. I raised the very real example of cocaine & tobacco on
> ancient Egyptian mummies which are only about a tenth as old, so one
> might presume the testing to be slightly less problematic.
>
> Now chew your cud. Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/694054825022930944

When they can only respond with insults & distractions, their arguments have no value to science and are best ignored.

DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

> When they can only respond with insults & distractions

...as opposed to raising genuine examples of how identifying ancient
organic compounds has proven to be highly problematic.

Of yours, you'd have to stop chewing cud long enough to read what was
actually stated.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/694054825022930944

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 3:59:20 PM UTC-5, Primum Sapienti wrote:
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
> Published: 10 September 2019
>
> Abstract
> Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
> cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
> produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
> appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
> survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
> by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
> products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
> to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
> use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
> the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
> the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
> alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
> technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
> and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
> lifeways.

Eating raw reindeer requires ultrathin slicing: https://youtu.be/HDICfd_tRXA

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> You simply declaring it doesn't make it so.
>
> And if you had reading comprehension & retention you'd know that I didn't
> simply declare. I raised the very real example of cocaine & tobacco on
> ancient Egyptian mummies which are only about a tenth as old, so one
> might presume the testing to be slightly less problematic.
>
> Now chew your cud. Thanks in advance.

From January:

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> As was just stated in that other thread on the topic, this type of
testing sucks
> eggs through a hose. It's really, Really, REALLY bad.
>
> Oh. That means it's the opposite of accurate.
>
> For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> trans Atlantic trade.
>
> Simply put: The testing sucks. It can't be trusted.

You simply declaring it doesn't make it so.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49650-8
Published: 10 September 2019

Abstract
Stone tools provide a unique window into the mode of adaptation and
cognitive abilities of Lower Paleolithic early humans. The persistently
produced large cutting tools (bifaces/handaxes) have long been an
appealing focus of research in the reconstruction of Lower Paleolithic
survival strategies, at the expenses of the small flake tools considered
by-products of the stone production process rather than desired end
products. Here, we use use-wear, residues and technological analyses
to show direct and very early evidence of the deliberate production and
use of small flakes for targeted stages of the prey butchery process at
the late Lower Paleolithic Acheulian site of Revadim, Israel. We highlight
the significant role of small flakes in Lower Paleolithic adaptation
alongside the canonical large handaxes. Our results demonstrate the
technological and cognitive flexibility of early human groups in the Levant
and beyond at the threshold of the departure from Lower Paleolithic
lifeways.

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

> > And if you had reading comprehension & retention you'd know that I didn't
> > simply declare. I raised the very real example of cocaine & tobacco on
> > ancient Egyptian mummies which are only about a tenth as old, so one
> > might presume the testing to be slightly less problematic.
> >
> > Now chew your cud. Thanks in advance.

> From January:
> I Envy JTEM wrote:

> > As was just stated in that other thread on the topic, this type of
> > testing sucks

So, I discussed it in another thread. Wow. That's awful. For you.

> > For example, they also claim to find cocaine & tobacco residue on Egyptian
> > mummies even though neither plant appears in ancient Egypt, not even as
> > depictions on tomb walls, and there has never been any evidence for a
> > trans Atlantic trade.

Okay. So you just proved that I was telling the truth, that I DIDN'T "simply
declare" anything, I referenced a real world example of how terrible testing for
organic matter can be... in the example of a much, Much, MUCH younger case.

So you knew I was telling the truth, you literally just quoting me NOT "Simply
declaring" only to conclude that you did the opposite.

Were you dropped on your head as a baby? More than once?

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/696159783196246016