Sharyn Woodcock (
Sat, 5 Oct 1996 01:37:27 +1000

On 30 Sep 1996, Joseph S Grossberg wrote:

> Hi all. New to this group, but not usenet. Anyways, I was wondering
> something.
> On the discovery of ~170,000 year old art in Australia (somthing they're
> making a huge deal of down here):
> I'm not particularly interested in whehter or not the claims are
> legitimate (for this thread's sake) but instead have this question-- why
> is everyone assuming that men/Aborigines/homo sapiens sapiens created the
> rock art? Could not have a hominid slightly "lower" than (and
> subsequently supplanted by) mankind have created the art?

This theory may sound well and good until one looks aa little
closer --- there are no ape species in the whole of Sahul (Australasia)
a Hominid to have evolved from. There has always been an expanse of water
to be crossed which involved the use of technology. That the Aboriginal
people of Australia are exactly that,, The original inhabitants of
Australia cannot be so easily explained away. It is simply that they have
been here a lot longer than was previosly believed.

> This would not throw a monkey wrench into current paleoanthropological
> thought, and I'm surprised it hasn't been forwarded as an explanation by
> the more skeptical members of the anthropological world.
> Thoughts? I know y'all have them!
> Joe.