Re: archaeological find in Oregon

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Paul Crowley: "Re: Speciation - how do you know?"
• Previous message: Holly Reeser: "Re: An alternative to ST and AAT"
• Maybe in reply to: Wilson Lynn: "archaeological find in Oregon"
• Next in thread: SHICKLEY@VM.TEMPLE.EDU: "Re: archaeological find in Oregon"

In article <keith.178.000BB5EB@gecko.biol.wits.ac.za>,
keith@gecko.biol.wits.ac.za (Keith Norris) wrote:

> In article <lmwilson.1.000DA475@sky.lakeheadu.ca>
lmwilson@sky.lakeheadu.ca (Wilson Lynn) writes:
> >From: lmwilson@sky.lakeheadu.ca (Wilson Lynn)
> >Subject: archaeological find in Oregon
> >Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 11:25:46 Local
> >Keywords: skull Caucasian Aboriginal
>
> >Did anyone hear the news item on CBC National News on Sunday Oct. 13.
It was
> >about a skeleton that was found in Oregon which was dated around 9,000 B.C.
> >The catch was that this skull was found to be Caucasian in origin! Does
> >anyone have any info re this controversial find?
>
> How the hell did they know? It is extremely difficult to tell EXTANT races
> apart merely from skulls, let alone EXTINCT ones.
>

I heard a few more details about this one. The skull has Caucasian
_characteristics_, which apparently are not unheard of in the native
peoples in that area. As Mr. Norris notes, you can't positively identify
race 100% of the time from just a skull, although you can make approximations.

-- 

Paul Myers                               Department of Biology

myers@netaxs.com                         Temple University

http://fishnet.bio.temple.edu/           Philadelphia, PA 19122

• Next message: Paul Crowley: "Re: Speciation - how do you know?"
• Previous message: Holly Reeser: "Re: An alternative to ST and AAT"
• Maybe in reply to: Wilson Lynn: "archaeological find in Oregon"
• Next in thread: SHICKLEY@VM.TEMPLE.EDU: "Re: archaeological find in Oregon"