Re: ABORIGINES?
Gerold Firl (geroldf@sdd.hp.com)
7 Oct 1996 19:36:39 GMT
In article <Pine.OSF.3.93.961005012049.25297A-100000@crab.jcu.edu.au>, Sharyn Woodcock <art-smw4@jcu.edu.au> writes:
|> On 30 Sep 1996, Joseph S Grossberg wrote:
|> > 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)
|> for
|> 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.
Actually, there have been a couple of "ape" species present in the
Sahul (?) prior to the appearance of h. sap. sap; homo erectus and
archaic h. sapiens. The only question is, did they manage to get across
the straits to australia? If pre-100,000 bp dates are correct, then it
appears that they did.
Has australia always been surrounded by water? Have any of the
glaciation events brought sea levels low enough to allow an easy
crossing? H. erectus has been in java for a long time; say, about a
million years. If they could get to java, australia doesn't seem out of
the question.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Disclaimer claims dat de claims claimed in dis are de claims of meself,
me, and me alone, so sue us god. I won't tell Bill & Dave if you won't.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=---- Gerold Firl @ ..hplabs!hp-sdd!geroldf
|