Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Homo Erectus travelled the high seas


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

Early manlike creatures may have been smarter than we think. Recent archaeological finds from the Mediterranean show that human ancestors traveled the high seas.

A team of researchers that included an N.C. State University geologist found evidence that our ancestors were crossing open water at least 130,000 years ago.That's more than 100,000 years earlier than scientists had previously thought.

Their evidence is based on stone tools from the island of Crete. Because Crete has been an island for eons, any prehistoric people who left tools behind would have had to cross open water to get there.

The tools the team found are so old that they predate the human species, said Thomas Strasser, an archaeologist from Providence College who led the team. Instead of being made by our species, Homo sapiens, the tools were made by our ancestors, Homo erectus.

arrow3.gifRead more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Swede

    6

  • Mike 215

    6

  • SewerRat

    3

  • F3SS

    2

I dig it. We still know nothing about our past, only some things.

Ok, That was lame. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I still can't get over "Homo erectus."

Sounds too funny to me every time I read it, I know its immature but seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I still can't get over "Homo erectus."

Sounds too funny to me every time I read it, I know its immature but seriously.

lmao i got kicked out of class so often for laughing about it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A search of posts at UM will reveal that I've postulated that H. Erectus was capable of this for many years now.

I just hope these dates hold up.

Erectus is my favorite human.

Harte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's reasonable to assume given the longevity of this species of ape.That it had been trapped there with the increase of sea levels.

Give me a shout when they find a boat.

Edited by philbo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was almost interesting.

Let me know when you find the S.S.Minnow.

Pulu si bagumba!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lmao i got kicked out of class so often for laughing about it...

Ah yes, teenage snickery towards dirty sounding words. Those were the days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Erm .. <huh-huh> .. hey Butthead"

"What, Beavis? .. <heh-heh>"

"So erm, there's like this island and erect homos played with their tools there? <huh-huh>"

"Are you threatening me? I am the great Cornholio! I need T.P. for my bunghole!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was almost interesting.

Let me know when you find the S.S.Minnow.

Pulu si bagumba!

Yup - it's on Vancouver Island. Last I heard it was being refitted for pleasure trips. But what the flying crap has that got to do with Stone Age Crete or the price of herring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was almost interesting.

Let me know when you find the S.S.Minnow.

Pulu si bagumba!

And 'Pulu si bagumba' means "Free the sausages" ... if I remember rightly ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Water is the easy way to get around that Homo Erectus use boats to get around prove they had more intelligence than we given them up to this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that Homo Erectus wasn't traveling the seas 130,000 years ago, but the fact that stone tools were found on Crete, does not imply sea travel, because dozens of settlements have been discovered deep under water in the Mediterranean, meaning that not so long ago, many places that were once above water are now below. So, for all we know, the Mediterranean ocean may not even have existed 130,000 years ago.

Edited by Psycho78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A search of posts at UM will reveal that I've postulated that H. Erectus was capable of this for many years now.

I just hope these dates hold up.

Erectus is my favorite human.

Harte

I haven't seen Erectus in quite awhile. Maybe I'm just too old.

Odie :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want evidence that man sailed and even mapped the world tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands years ago, you should read MAPS OF THE ANCIENT KINGS by Professsor Charles Hapgood (see amazon.com and google) The book was published over 40 years ago and it proves that the world was mapped way before the dawn of history.

What Hapgood proves is that the continent of Antarctica was mapped by ancient SEA KINGS as he called them when the continent was ice free. And these maps were made available to the early explorers and map makers. All the 16th,17th and 18th century world maps showed Antactica hundreds of years before it was offically discovered in 1820. Even Columbus had one of these maps called the Piri Reis Map (see google). If you want to see one of these incredible maps, look up the following on google: Oronteus Finaeus World Map of 1532; Mercator's World Map of 1538; Mercator's World Map of 1569

Since Hapgood's book was published new evidence shows that the last time the continent was ice free was several million years ago. So that is the mystery of who or what did this mapping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These professor are determined to prove that the unglaciated Antarctica found on the Piri Reis map and others of the 16th and 17th centuries is reallly Australia.

However they are lying because geologists have accepted that these ancient maps show Antarctica without its ice. See the following article from the NY Times on google: NEW ANALYSIS HINTS ANCIENT EXPLORERS MAPPED ANTARCTIC (Sept 25, 1984). So the geologists say it is Antarctica while the history professors say it is Australia. Who do you think is telling the truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These professor are determined to prove that the unglaciated Antarctica found on the Piri Reis map and others of the 16th and 17th centuries is reallly Australia.

However they are lying because geologists have accepted that these ancient maps show Antarctica without its ice. See the following article from the NY Times on google: NEW ANALYSIS HINTS ANCIENT EXPLORERS MAPPED ANTARCTIC (Sept 25, 1984). So the geologists say it is Antarctica while the history professors say it is Australia. Who do you think is telling the truth?

Believe that we have been over this before.

1) Your 1984 newspaper reference is notably outdated.

2) Did you actually read the references provided by Abe, particularly that of Steve Dutch?

3) The Vostok ice-coring project demonstrates that Antarctica has been glaciated for at least ~ 511,000 years. See below:

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/antarctica/lemieux-dudon2010timescales.txt

For further information from the base site:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_timescales.html

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a big problem with the unglaciated Antarctica shown on these ancient maps. The continent has rotated 180 degrees from its present position. According to some of the theories of continental drift the continent was last in that position hundrreds of millions of years. So somebody or something mapped this contient that many years ago. That is something Hapgood or even Eric Von Danien dared not explore. Look at the Orontius Finaeus Map of 1531. The question I have is where are the original source maps that he and Mercator were copying from? Hapgood thinks they are in the Vatican Library. In some of the 16th and 17th century maps showing Antarctica did name some of the features after Vatican Officals.

Did you know that Captain Cook's mission was to discover Antarctica and seize it for the British Empire? Forty years before it was actually discovered Cook was told that it was a rich continent with over 100 million people by the head of Map divsion of the Royal Navy. Cook tried three times to reach the continent but his ships could not break through the ice. He circled it seveal times and then gave up and sailed north to Alaska and Hawaii where he was killed.

The problem Cook had was that his info was millions of years out of date and he did not know it was covered with 10,000 feet of ice,

The continent was offically discovered in 1820 by three countries, Russia, Britain and the US. These were seal hunters and their boats were strong enough to get within a few miles of the contient but could not land because of the ice. The first human to land on the continent took place in 1890 when steel ships were able to break through the ice.

And it was in the 1950 that radar imaging was able to map the land under the ice which matched up with the ancient maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a big problem with the unglaciated Antarctica shown on these ancient maps. The continent has rotated 180 degrees from its present position. According to some of the theories of continental drift the continent was last in that position hundrreds of millions of years. So somebody or something mapped this contient that many years ago. That is something Hapgood or even Eric Von Danien dared not explore. Look at the Orontius Finaeus Map of 1531. The question I have is where are the original source maps that he and Mercator were copying from? Hapgood thinks they are in the Vatican Library. In some of the 16th and 17th century maps showing Antarctica did name some of the features after Vatican Officals.

Did you know that Captain Cook's mission was to discover Antarctica and seize it for the British Empire? Forty years before it was actually discovered Cook was told that it was a rich continent with over 100 million people by the head of Map divsion of the Royal Navy. Cook tried three times to reach the continent but his ships could not break through the ice. He circled it seveal times and then gave up and sailed north to Alaska and Hawaii where he was killed.

The problem Cook had was that his info was millions of years out of date and he did not know it was covered with 10,000 feet of ice,

The continent was offically discovered in 1820 by three countries, Russia, Britain and the US. These were seal hunters and their boats were strong enough to get within a few miles of the contient but could not land because of the ice. The first human to land on the continent took place in 1890 when steel ships were able to break through the ice.

And it was in the 1950 that radar imaging was able to map the land under the ice which matched up with the ancient maps.

As demonstrated by the following two animations, Antarctica has been in a generally polar location for at least some 150 million years.

http://www.classzone.com/books/earth_science/terc/content/visualizations/es3005/es3005page01.cfm

http://www.scotese.com/pangeanim.htm

Given the coring data already presented, the timing of the most recent extensive glaciation (the Wisconsin, beginning circa 110,000 to 100,000 BP), and the current documentation for the earliest H. sapiens (Omo I, circa 196,000 BP), the potential for the mapping of a unglaciated Antarctica is extremely remote, to say the least.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of those strange but true facts. But if they did, why such a spotty record? Well, because we are periodically invaded by a magnetic cloud (that infamous blue star is a neutron bitsy) that first compresses as it incurrs, then when it passes the planetary body, the body expands, its molecular bonds stretch out and are exposed to cosmic rays in a huge way.

Science should have been tieing all this together but all we got was black holes and gravity waves. Like the Tshirt that says Mom and Dad went to Florida and all I got was this lousy Tshirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.