#1. Who said they didn't?

There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
compelling evidence but some evidence just the
same. Erectus may have reached the Americas. Maybe
not.

#2. Define "Reaching the Americas"

If a single toe from a single erectus touched shore on
the Americas, does that count? I would think not. I
would think that be "erectus in the Americas" it's
meant that a sustained population existed for, I dunno,
some generations? But given how massive the expanse
that is the Americas -- north & south -- and the major
changes to the topography, would we even find them?

We find Clovis points, right? But what of the Clovis people?

https://news.ku.dk/all_news/2014/02/americas-only-clovis-skeleton-had-its-genome-mapped/

So even if erectus did reach the Americas we wouldn't
find per se, we'd only find tools they have left behind,
and this brings us back to point #1, above, because
there are anomalous finds that are claimed to be within
the age range necessary for erectus...

#3. Erectus wasn't cold-adapted

Erectus seems to be a tropical or very-near-tropical
people. We don't find them in Germany or the U.K.
at all, now do we? Their European adventures seem
to be limited to the southeast -- warmer Mediterranean
climates. Heidelberg man or "Antecessor" had to
evolve before they could start spreading north.

Maybe they lacked protected clothing?

Let's face it, if you're diving underwater then animal
skins are going to weigh you down. And even if they
didn't, frigid waters are NOT what you're going to want
to be diving into...

Homo erectus likely had very different mtDNA, a
lineage that wasn't producing the energy (warmth) it
needed to help them tolerate the cold.

This would not stop erectus from thriving in many
parts of the Americas, where it would be plenty warm
enough, but they'd have to reach them first. The route
through Siberia would certainly be out of the question.
Direct routes across the sea would be so difficult that
we could rule out anything other than accidental.. which
is NOT a good model for a sustained population at all.

In summation: Homo erectus didn't reach the Americas
because they were not cold adapted, and thus the only
routes open to them were not conducive to enough
individuals collecting in one area at one time to form a
breeding population.

::Discuss::

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/679904370902679552

There were no planes, yet.

On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 12:05:31 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> There were no planes, yet.

There were flood plains, that's close enough.

On 28.3.2022. 11:20, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 12:05:31 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> There were no planes, yet.
>
> There were flood plains, that's close enough.

There weren't ships, either. Only giant Dumbos, and similar nasty
creatures :) .
https://youtu.be/Pg0fsuumQLw

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com

On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 6:16:55 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 28.3.2022. 11:20, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 12:05:31 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> >> There were no planes, yet.
> >
> > There were flood plains, that's close enough.
> There weren't ships, either. Only giant Dumbos, and similar nasty
> creatures :) .
> https://youtu.be/Pg0fsuumQLw
>
> --
> https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
> human-e...@googlegroups.com

Big ears & big nose: dumbo & pink panther? https://youtu.be/CEWUnNXKFtM

I thought you said they were building wooden ships.

On 28.3.2022. 13:56, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 6:16:55 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> On 28.3.2022. 11:20, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
>>> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 12:05:31 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>> There were no planes, yet.
>>>
>>> There were flood plains, that's close enough.
>> There weren't ships, either. Only giant Dumbos, and similar nasty
>> creatures :) .
>> https://youtu.be/Pg0fsuumQLw
>
> Big ears & big nose: dumbo & pink panther? https://youtu.be/CEWUnNXKFtM
>
> I thought you said they were building wooden ships.

Canoes. You got to have ground tools to make hollow tree trunks. You
got to have bronze to make wooden ships.
I didn't read what JTEM wrote, but Chinese had all of those, and yet,
they didn't come to America. Too cold. Eskimos did, though.
In my view, we are modern erectus. The only difference is the use of
hematite, nothing else. So, erectus started to use hematite and became
human.
I mean, it isn't easy to live in cold, you have to be adapted to it.
Hematite produced (obviously) two kind of humans, Neanderthals and Homo
sapiens. Neanderthals were adapted to coldness.

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com

On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:44:05 PM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 28.3.2022. 13:56, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 6:16:55 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> >> On 28.3.2022. 11:20, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> >>> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 12:05:31 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> >>>> There were no planes, yet.
> >>>
> >>> There were flood plains, that's close enough.
> >> There weren't ships, either. Only giant Dumbos, and similar nasty
> >> creatures :) .
> >> https://youtu.be/Pg0fsuumQLw
> >
> > Big ears & big nose: dumbo & pink panther? https://youtu.be/CEWUnNXKFtM
> >
> > I thought you said they were building wooden ships.
> Canoes. You got to have ground tools to make hollow tree trunks. You
> got to have bronze to make wooden ships.
> I didn't read what JTEM wrote, but Chinese had all of those, and yet,
> they didn't come to America. Too cold. Eskimos did, though.
> In my view, we are modern erectus. The only difference is the use of
> hematite, nothing else. So, erectus started to use hematite and became
> human.
> I mean, it isn't easy to live in cold, you have to be adapted to it.
> Hematite produced (obviously) two kind of humans, Neanderthals and Homo
> sapiens. Neanderthals were adapted to coldness.
>
> --
> https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
> human-e...@googlegroups.com

The first canoes were of bark, not wood, cut with stone choppers. In Australia, no dugout canoes until late, but they had bark canoes, also used in Chile & Amazon and Canada (Chippewa birch bark canoes). Later log canoes.

I Envy JTEM wrote:
>
> #1. Who said they didn't?
>
> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly

Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> > There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly

> Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?

Teehee, teehee, you are shockingly clever... must be the funniest
alcoholic in your entire trailer park!

Yes, I know someone who started a UFO group a zillion years
ago. And if you need to cling to that, tell yourself that it makes
stupid claims like "Naledi buried their dead" slightly less stupid,
you go right ahead. It'll give me yet another thing to humiliate
you over.

Whatever.

I don't care. I have a very long history in discussion groups and
I never ever shied away from responding in kind. I am not "Above
it all." So if you'd rather I rub your nose in your troll droppings
than discuss these issues, I'm fine with that.

Now, you were just confessing to be totally ignorant of any of the
"anomalous" finds concerning humans in the Americas long before
Clovis.

Not surprised that you would be ignorant, even after I had just
posted a video on that very topic...

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/KFzSoJv9U3A/m/T-cFCsgXAQAJ

You should watch the video. It's the only way you'll be able to
misunderstand it.

KISSES!

-- --

https://uapro.tumblr.com/post/681515547052195840/the-world-owes-you-15-minutes-of-fame-its-time

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>>> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
>
>> Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?

What "anamolous" finds ->

Primum Sapienti wrote:
[...]

So do you bother with a glass at this point or have you graduated to
drinking straight from the bottle.

Whatever. You can spend all day pretending that being oblivious to
your surroundings makes you clever, because it's not like you can
see what you look like...

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/681558557689266176

Primum Sapienti wrote:
> I Envy JTEM wrote:
>>   Primum Sapienti wrote:
>>
>>>> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
>>
>>> Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?
>
> What "anamolous" finds ->

Primum Sapienti wrote:

[anomalous stupidity blissfully snipped]

Wow, you repeated your idiocy and now the video I cited vanished.... IT'S
LIKE MAGIC! However do you manage?

Drink up. The night is young!

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/682443470330298368

I Envy JTEM wrote:
>
> #1. Who said they didn't?
>
> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
> compelling evidence but some evidence just the
> same. Erectus may have reached the Americas. Maybe
> not.

What "anamolous" NA finds?

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> What

Gosh that's clever. Keep playing dumb!

Lol! Notice how I politely said "Playing?"

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/683261073766400000

Primum Sapienti wrote:
> I Envy JTEM wrote:
>> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>>
>>>> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
>>
>>> Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?
>
> What "anamolous" finds ->

Primum Sapienti wrote:

[...]

Wow, the drool on your chin is quite impressive... the sure sign of
a brilliant man!

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/688718317001801728

Primum Sapienti wrote:
> I Envy JTEM wrote:
>> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>>
>>>> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
>>
>>> Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?
>
> What "anamolous" finds ->

Primum Sapienti wrote:

[...]

This is genuinely dull.

What do you think you're disputing here? Hmm?

Say it. Spell it out. What are you trying to dispute, and
what are you pretending it means?

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/691353674855972864

On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 5:56:34 PM UTC-4, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:44:05 PM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> > On 28.3.2022. 13:56, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> > > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 6:16:55 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> > >> On 28.3.2022. 11:20, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 12:05:31 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> > >>>> There were no planes, yet.
> > >>>
> > >>> There were flood plains, that's close enough.
> > >> There weren't ships, either. Only giant Dumbos, and similar nasty
> > >> creatures :) .
> > >> https://youtu.be/Pg0fsuumQLw
> > >
> > > Big ears & big nose: dumbo & pink panther? https://youtu.be/CEWUnNXKFtM
> > >
> > > I thought you said they were building wooden ships.
> > Canoes. You got to have ground tools to make hollow tree trunks. You
> > got to have bronze to make wooden ships.
> > I didn't read what JTEM wrote, but Chinese had all of those, and yet,
> > they didn't come to America. Too cold. Eskimos did, though.
> > In my view, we are modern erectus. The only difference is the use of
> > hematite, nothing else. So, erectus started to use hematite and became
> > human.
> > I mean, it isn't easy to live in cold, you have to be adapted to it.
> > Hematite produced (obviously) two kind of humans, Neanderthals and Homo
> > sapiens. Neanderthals were adapted to coldness.
> >
> > --
> > https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
> > human-e...@googlegroups.com
> The first canoes were of bark, not wood, cut with stone choppers. In Australia, no dugout canoes until late, but they had bark canoes, also used in Chile & Amazon and Canada (Chippewa birch bark canoes). Later log canoes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-11070001/Humans-settled-North-America-17-000-years-EARLIER-previously-believed-study-finds.html

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> This is genuinely dull.
>
> What do you think you're disputing here? Hmm?
>
> Say it. Spell it out. What are you trying to dispute, and
> what are you pretending it means?

Primum Sapienti wrote:
> I Envy JTEM wrote:
>> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>>
>>>> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
>>
>>> Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?
>
> What "anamolous" finds ->

How many times will you dodge this question?

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> How many times will you dodge this question?

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/XeL8jSZboC8/m/sNK6VzU3AQAJ

Fascinating. You've got to know on some level, as strangled as your
frontal lobe may be by your emotional "Issues," that if anyone but us
is here, following along, they know you're an idiot.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/691966152530903040

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> How many times will you dodge this question?
>
> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/XeL8jSZboC8/m/sNK6VzU3AQAJ
>
> Fascinating. You've got to know on some level, as strangled as your
> frontal lobe may be by your emotional "Issues," that if anyone but us
> is here, following along, they know you're an idiot.

You made up the claim. No surprise.

Primum Sapienti wrote:
> I Envy JTEM wrote:
>> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>>
>>>> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
>>
>>> Like what? Bigfoot? One of your UFOs?
>
> What "anamolous" finds ->

How many times will you dodge this question?

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> You made up the claim.

What claim? Are you still pretending that there are no anomalous
finds or at least none ever mentioned in this group? That's dumb.

Look. You suffer from a narcissistic personality disorder. You need to
disrupt, STOP any conversation you can't control. It's a compulsion for
your type. So you make demands for... for... stupid shit. Probably
because it shut you down so many times in the past you think it must
also work on everybody else.

It doesn't.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/693572982046588928

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> You made up the claim.
>
> What claim? Are you still pretending that there are no anomalous

The claim you're making.

> finds or at least none ever mentioned in this group? That's dumb.

Re: Why erectus never made it to the Americas
I Envy JTEM wrote:
>
> #1. Who said they didn't?
>
> There's plenty of "anomalous" finds. No proof, hardly
> compelling evidence but some evidence just the
> same. Erectus may have reached the Americas. Maybe
> not.

Now, WHAT anomalus NA finds?