• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Atl-Atl weapons and origins of tools


Robert Baird

Paranormal Maven
Atl-atl weapons and the beginning of tools
Professor Jesse Jennings has this important hunting technology invented in the Atlanta area around the 9th Millennium BCE. I think it is proof of ocean travel and came to the Americas with the people we see over 50,000 years ago in Topper.


Andrew Collins would make hay with a connection to the name and Atlantis, but it existed before the name Atlantis probably and Atlantis is a myth for making it appear all early travel around the world is also a myth.

http://archaeology.about.com/od/aterms/g/atlatl.htm

There is a growing acceptance of what once was a known fact - the Old Copper Culture and North American metal-working including spalling which leads to alloys. The Smithsonian brought all experts to the task in the late 19th C. and said it was as important as the Giza Plateau. So why was it thrown on the dung heap? Why is it still blasphemy to talk about smelting in Peru making an iron crowbar even though it exists. Why? Because if it were proven that people from all over the world were here long before the Clovis crap about some Bering Bridge 12,000 years ago. If we knew much of what the world scientists have brought to the table was from the Americas which had the best cities and culture just before invaded and ripped off under the banner of Manifest Destiny. Maybe the courts would allow claims of Sovereign Rights for people of the Brotherhood who have been genocidally abused and persecuted with many entire cultures wiped out forever.

The following site still talks Clovis nonsense regarding the Atl-Atl. http://copperculture.homestead.com/atlatl.html

But the same site is a little better when it refers to Euro-centric bias and lies in another section.

http://copperculture.homestead.com/index.html

Sardinia's castles in the era before Rome and as far back as the Hyksos rule in Egypt had cross bows and could defend every inch of the large island. No explanations forthcoming from academia. In fact you'll hear more about alien intervention than such facts. I say "pluck yew" (which is the derivation of the phrase often heard 'f*ck you') to those who think modern weapons up until the second world war were significantly better than the ancients.

"Its size suggests that it was one of the most powerful bows of its era. Historical texts indicate that its firing range could have been up to 2,600 feet, according to Huashang Newspaper, which is double the range of an assault rifle, which is about 1,300 feet.

Some historians believe that analysis of a number of historical texts shows that the crossbow was integral to several important military victories of the period."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/peop...-Warriors.html

http://blog.world-mysteries.com/scie...ped-the-world/

The Phoenician ships which traveled the oceans of the whole world had windlass technology which I say lead to this crossbow technology. There is no technology prior to 1950 which man did not invent. No mystery I have not proven to be Earth created. Man was capable of attunement across dimensions and space since man became conscious as a mammal in the evolution of our species. That is not alien intervention and how specific these attunements are or were is a matter of debate to say the least. If aliens are crashing their ships (Rather than secret and black projects from the Skunk Works people I have known, when I lived near S-4 and 5.) then they are not highly evolved and could not get through space debris - a problem we now face as we approach inter-stellar capability with Ion Pulse or Ram-Jet propulsion.
 
Atl-atl weapons and the beginning of tools
Professor Jesse Jennings has this important hunting technology invented in the Atlanta area around the 9th Millennium BCE. I think it is proof of ocean travel and came to the Americas with the people we see over 50,000 years ago in Topper.


Andrew Collins would make hay with a connection to the name and Atlantis, but it existed before the name Atlantis probably and Atlantis is a myth for making it appear all early travel around the world is also a myth.

http://archaeology.about.com/od/aterms/g/atlatl.htm

There is a growing acceptance of what once was a known fact - the Old Copper Culture and North American metal-working including spalling which leads to alloys. The Smithsonian brought all experts to the task in the late 19th C. and said it was as important as the Giza Plateau. So why was it thrown on the dung heap? Why is it still blasphemy to talk about smelting in Peru making an iron crowbar even though it exists. Why? Because if it were proven that people from all over the world were here long before the Clovis crap about some Bering Bridge 12,000 years ago. If we knew much of what the world scientists have brought to the table was from the Americas which had the best cities and culture just before invaded and ripped off under the banner of Manifest Destiny. Maybe the courts would allow claims of Sovereign Rights for people of the Brotherhood who have been genocidally abused and persecuted with many entire cultures wiped out forever.

The following site still talks Clovis nonsense regarding the Atl-Atl. http://copperculture.homestead.com/atlatl.html

But the same site is a little better when it refers to Euro-centric bias and lies in another section.

http://copperculture.homestead.com/index.html

Sardinia's castles in the era before Rome and as far back as the Hyksos rule in Egypt had cross bows and could defend every inch of the large island. No explanations forthcoming from academia. In fact you'll hear more about alien intervention than such facts. I say "pluck yew" (which is the derivation of the phrase often heard 'f*ck you') to those who think modern weapons up until the second world war were significantly better than the ancients.

"Its size suggests that it was one of the most powerful bows of its era. Historical texts indicate that its firing range could have been up to 2,600 feet, according to Huashang Newspaper, which is double the range of an assault rifle, which is about 1,300 feet.

Some historians believe that analysis of a number of historical texts shows that the crossbow was integral to several important military victories of the period."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/peop...-Warriors.html

http://blog.world-mysteries.com/scie...ped-the-world/

The Phoenician ships which traveled the oceans of the whole world had windlass technology which I say lead to this crossbow technology. There is no technology prior to 1950 which man did not invent. No mystery I have not proven to be Earth created. Man was capable of attunement across dimensions and space since man became conscious as a mammal in the evolution of our species. That is not alien intervention and how specific these attunements are or were is a matter of debate to say the least. If aliens are crashing their ships (Rather than secret and black projects from the Skunk Works people I have known, when I lived near S-4 and 5.) then they are not highly evolved and could not get through space debris - a problem we now face as we approach inter-stellar capability with Ion Pulse or Ram-Jet propulsion.
 
From a friend, part of a larger discourse.

"Just when we left trees as a place to live (rather than caves as once thought) is a matter of contention. The age of early hominids still has a way to go as I see it. "Despite the ability to walk upright, early relatives of humanity represented by the famed "Lucy" fossil likely spent much of their time in trees, remaining very active climbers, researchers say. Humans are unique among living primates in that walking bipedally — on two feet — is humans' chief mode of locomotion. This upright posture freed us.


Totally agree with your statement, "The age of early hominids still has a way to go as I see it." All a person has to do is look around and watch human behaviour to come to that conclusion... LOL. All that other stuff is very interesting and reinforces the notion that the more we think we know about our anthropological history the less we understand. At least in my opinion.

Also, much of the conclusions drawn from the experimentation in "theory of the mind" is speculation, not necessarily accurate. For example the fact that the chimp slinks around out of sight etc waiting till you can't see the banana. We do not know for certain what the chimp is thinking or why. We only know what we observe and it doesn't necessarily mean what they've concluded. Perhaps the chimp is not thinking about what you are thinking at all, as is suggested. Rather its actions could be more dependent upon what it it self is looking at and seeing, and takes action when it can no longer see the other.



I had a number of smart dogs in my life and they do similar things, and we don't consider dogs as being on the same level of the evolutionary scale as chimps, yet in many ways they are a smart... but different.



And if I wanted to take the time I could find perhaps a hundred or more, maybe thousands of life forms that display some sort of tools use... even down to the microbial level. Tool use is certainly not exclusive to humans. What that means is simply that "tool use" or the ability to adapt to the environment via the use of something in that environment is simply one aspect of life that is shared between humans and other life forms.



Hell, many life forms actually use other life forms as tools if you want to take the definition of "tool use" to the extremem. Does one life form in a symbiotic relationship not use the other as a tool of survival?

I believe it does.


Same with parasites really, but perhaps that is taking the definition to too much of an extreme in that context... LOL.

Animals that live in communities become dependent upon one another, so in a sense are using one another as tools. We certainly do that as humans... so I guess what i'm saying is that we are all TOOLS... LOL.

Sorry, just had to throw that in there for a laugh, but really it's true.

Even members of a pod of killer whales work together to kill prey. Is that not a form of using one another as tools? I believe it is.


And I thought it was the breakdown of the bicameral mind that separated us from other animals?

Goes to show you what little I know... :p



There is considerable discussion about the definition of what constitutes a tool and therefore which behaviours can be considered as true examples of tool use. A wide range of animals are considered to use tools including mammals, birds, fish, cephalopods and insects.
Rarely, animals have been observed making their own tools, e.g. primates sharpening a stick to use as a weapon, or removing leaves and twigs from a branch and fishing for termites with a stem frayed by chewing.

The key to identifying tool use is defining what constitutes a tool. Researchers of animal behavior have arrived at different formulations.

In 1980, Beck published a widely used definition of tool use.[4] More recently, this has been modified to -


"The external employment of an unattached or manipulable attached environmental object to alter more efficiently the form, position, or condition of another object, another organism, or the user itself, when the user holds and directly manipulates the tool during or prior to use and is responsible for the proper and effective orientation of the tool.[5]

Other, briefer definitions have been proposed -


"An object carried or maintained for future use"

—Finn, Tregenza, and Norman, 2009.[6]


"The use of physical objects other than the animal's own body or appendages as a means to extend the physical influence realized by the animal"

—Jones and Kamil, 1973[7]


"An object that has been modified to fit a purpose" or "An inanimate object that one uses or modifies in some way to cause a change in the environment, thereby facilitating one's achievement of a target goal".

—Hauser, 2000[8]

Others, for example Lawick-Goodall,[9] distinguish between "tool use" and "object use".

Different terms have been given to the tool according to whether the tool is altered by the animal. If the "tool" is not held or manipulated by the animal in any way, such as an immobile anvil, objects in a bowerbird's bower, or a bird using bread as bait to catch fish,[10] it is sometimes referred to as a "proto-tool". Several studies in primates and birds have found that tool use is correlated with an enlargement of the brain as a whole or of particular regions. For example, true tool-using birds have relatively larger brains than proto-tool users.[11]

When an animal uses a tool that acts on another tool, this has been termed use of a "meta-tool". For example, New Caledonian crows will spontaneously use a short tool to obtain an otherwise inaccessible longer tool that then allows them to extract food from a hole.[11] Similarly, bearded capuchin monkeys will use smaller stones to loosen bigger quartz pebbles embedded in conglomerate rock, which they subsequently use as tools.[12]

Rarely, animals may use one tool followed by another, for example, bearded capuchins use stones and sticks, or two stones.[12] This is called "associative", "secondary" or "sequential" tool use.[13]

Some animals use other individuals in a way which could be interpreted as tool use, for example, ants crossing water over a bridge of other ants, or weaver ants using conspecifics to glue leaves together. These have been termed "social tools".[14]

He had questions about how our scientists know some things about brains and their size - from which these scientists presume or extrapolate certain things not otherwise in evidence.

They have ways to see the lines in a skull to know that the Hobbit was a very advanced human not just an ape. The lines reflect how the brain structure was. The size of the skull of Neanderthal and the slope of the forehead have a lot to do with it. True the brain might have developed speech in lobes different than we have - but I don't think so. I go with the larger brain of the Neanderthal by 10% and no lobes for speech. It is important to remember science has now proven many humans are part Neanderthal. This makes one ask how much more functional they were at something else. I suggest it wasn't just what we call ESP but maybe spiritual esoteric knowledge and attunement. For example Eustace Mullins can see across a whole valley in the Appalachians Mountains to notice a bird or animal we couldn't see from a mile away. Maybe the Neanderthal could de-materialize or bi-locate, a very useful skill indeed, just ask Pythagoras or St. Germain.
 
It was the mid-nineties when I first heard about refined tools found in Africa and dated to 80,000 years ago. This was a quantum leap and fits into my history of far more advanced ancient cultures on earth because Europe of 16,000 years ago was the oldest for such a refined tool previous to this find. Of course the evidence for my history has continued fast and furious. While the academics who will still be found clinging to their ego and denying they were brainwashed supporters of racist agendas and EMPIRE, are found in fewer places. I say tools started with wooden sticks and spears in the hands of apes, who still do it today in the wild.

"One of the features that distinguishes humans and their hominid ancestors from the rest of the animal kingdom is their possession of complex culture, which includes the ability to communicate with spoken language, create art and make tools. The oldest stone tools dated so far are nearly 2.6-million years old and come from Ethiopia.

Our ancestors only began to make more refined tools from bone much more recently, probably only within the last 100,000 years. Bone tools dated to about 80,000 years ago have been found in Blombos Cave, on the southern Cape coast of South Africa.

Some scientists have argued that hominids such as Paranthropus robustus were making bone tools in the Cradle of Humankind far longer ago – perhaps more than 1-million years ago – though this is controversial.

There are two main types of stone tool – those based on flakes chopped off cores of rock, and those made on cores themselves.


The stone flakes, or flake tools, that were struck off the cores, were more usually the desired end-product and were used for cutting and skinning animals or to work plant materials.

Stone cores result from striking flakes of stone off a rock. They are commonly no more than by-products of stone tool making. But some cores could have been used to break open bones for their protein-rich marrow and to chop up tough vegetation for eating. Rocks that weren’t fashioned into stone tools could also have been by hominids for pounding or crushing seeds and for throwing, for example.

Sterkfontein has produced the oldest stone tools in Southern Africa – cores and flakes of the Oldowan industry dating to nearly 2-million years ago."


http://www.maropeng.co.za/content/page/stone_tools

I do not consider the content of the following link to be up to date with recent discoveries, in line with what I say, or even close to well-reasoned but it deserves serious inspection as does a 1922 article or chapter from a book by H. G. Wells.

http://www.beforebc.de/Made.by.Human.../51-10-35.html

This excellent book from 1914 is (of course) talking about early man being 100,000 years old and we have beaten this kind of stupidity back a very long way. But in some circles we still find people thinking art began in the Lascaux caves of just 30,000 years ago, the author addresses. I was so happy to see art found in Indonesia dated over 500,000 years ago in 2014. It is a well-written authoritative book written by one of the very best in academia with input from all the best experts.

As you read it try to think about naturally occurring weapons like shark's teeth (megalodon was still around perhaps) sabre-tooth tiger teeth, Rhino horns and straight elephant tusks, straightened mammoth tusks (Used for building near Moscow in digs dated to this era.) and petrified dinosaur teeth. The obsidian rock could make a knife that modern surgeons would be happy to use and at Catal Hayuk Jacquetta Hawkes (Atlas of Archaeology) said the people were precociously modern. But that was just 10,000 years ago and it might be a stretch when I say that the same kind of culture might have existed near Dolni Vestonici 29,000 years ago. I take a little from it in reference to Java Man and Neanderthal. In the era this book was written human origins were dated around 500,000 years at the very oldest and Java Man was not given as old a date as that. Many still said it was not human in the early 1950s but in the early 1970s we knew it was about a million years old and part of what we then named as Homo Erectus. I think we will find 12 million year old humans some day soon.

"This accords with the estimate of the brain capacity[P] of 855 c.cm. (Dubois) as compared with 1,230 c.cm., the smallest brain capacity found in a member of the Neanderthal race. Second, as seen from above, we are struck with the great length of the calvarium as compared with its breadth, the cephalic index or ratio of breadth to length being 73.4 per cent (Schwalbe) as compared with 73.9 per cent in the Neanderthal type skull; this dolichocephaly accords with the fact that all of the earliest human races thus far found are long-headed, although according to Schwalbe(22) all anthropoids are broad-headed. This is a very important distinction. The third feature is the prominence and width of the bony eyebrow ridges above the orbits, which are almost as great as in the chimpanzee and greatly exceed those[Pg 79] of the Neanderthal race and of the modern Australian. The profile of the Trinil head restored by McGregor (Fig. 38) exhibits this prominent bony ridge and the low, retreating forehead. In the latest opinion of Schwalbe(23) Pithecanthropus may be regarded as one of the direct ancestors of Neanderthal man and even of the highest human species, Homo sapiens. He also considers that when the lower jaw of the Trinil race becomes known, it will be found to be very similar to that of the Heidelberg man, the final conclusion being that Pithecanthropus and the nearly allied Heidelberg man may be regarded as the common ancestors of the Neanderthal race, on the one hand, and of the higher races on the other. There are, however, reasons for excluding Pithecanthropus from the direct ancestral line of the higher races of man."

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/43820...-h/43820-h.htm
 
Back
Top