The distributions of density in (P 100 km−2) for a 43, b 42, c 41, d 40, e 39 and f 38 ka are shown. The symbols represent the AUR archaeological sites for different phases (full black dots: Phase 1; open circle: Phase 2; and red triangles: Core sites).
There are of course, very many things Bible-literalist creationists need to ignore, lie about and/or misrepresent to maintain the delusion of Earth being just a few thousand years old, not the least of which is the abundant geological and archaeological evidence of human activity long before they believe Earth was created by magic out of nothing in the so-called 'Creation Week'.
Their handicap is in trying to compress the entire 13.8 billion year history of the Universe, the 3.8 billion year history of planet Earth and the 2-3 million year history of human evolution, into 10,000 or fewer years, and then trying to ignore the evidence of continuous, unbroken cultural history extending from way before a global genocidal flood, right through it and continuing to modern times, as though such a flood never happened.
And, as is normal with science, a paper just published in Nature Communications, gives them more evidence to ignore, lie about and/or misrepresent. It shows the history of early modern human migration across Europe during the Aurignacian (43,000 -32,000 years ago). The research comes from a team from the University of Cologne, Germany, led by Professor Dr Yaping Shao. It is explained in a University of Cologne press release:
Tell me all about the Aurignacian in Europe between 43,000 and 32,000 years ago, please. The Aurignacian culture, dating from about 43,000 to 32,000 years ago, marks a significant period in prehistoric Europe. It is named after the Aurignac site in France and is characterized by the spread of early modern humans (Homo sapiens) across Europe, their technological advancements, and their cultural and artistic expressions.The team developed a mathematical model, the human existence potential (HEP) which was derived from three components:
Key Aspects of the Aurignacian in Europe:
- Early Modern Human Presence:
- The Aurignacian period is associated with the arrival and expansion of anatomically modern humans in Europe. These humans are believed to have migrated from Africa, bringing with them new technologies, cultural practices, and survival strategies.
- This period overlaps with the gradual disappearance of Neanderthals, who had previously inhabited Europe. It is believed that there may have been some interaction and cultural exchange between Neanderthals and modern humans during this time.
- Technological Innovations:
- Stone Tools: Aurignacian stone tools exhibit significant technological advances over earlier periods. Typical tools include blades, burins (chisel-like tools), and scrapers made from high-quality flint or other stones. The tools were often elongated and had sharp, straight edges.
- Bone and Antler Tools: Aurignacians were among the first to create tools from bone, antler, and ivory. They crafted items like awls, needles, and spear points, demonstrating a diversification in tool types and materials. The “split-based point,” a distinctive type of bone point used for hunting, is a hallmark of the period.
- Hafting Technology: Evidence suggests that they used complex hafting techniques, where blades and points were attached to handles or shafts, enhancing hunting effectiveness.
- Art and Symbolism:
- The Aurignacian period is renowned for its early examples of figurative art and symbolic behavior. This includes some of the earliest known cave paintings, such as those found in Chauvet Cave in France, which depict animals like horses, lions, and rhinoceroses.
- Portable Art: Aurignacian people also created portable art objects, such as small figurines carved from mammoth ivory or stone. The "Venus figurines," which represent female forms, are among the earliest known examples of prehistoric sculpture.
- Personal Ornaments: Aurignacians produced personal adornments like beads, pendants, and bracelets, often made from materials like ivory, bone, and shells. These items likely had social or symbolic meanings.
- Subsistence and Lifestyle:
- Hunting and Gathering: Aurignacians were primarily hunter-gatherers. Their diet consisted of large herbivores such as reindeer, mammoths, horses, and bison, as well as smaller game, fish, and plant resources. The remains of large game animals at sites suggest that they employed organized hunting strategies.
- Seasonal Mobility: Aurignacian groups were likely semi-nomadic, moving seasonally to exploit different resources. They inhabited a variety of environments, from open plains and river valleys to forested areas.
- Shelters: Evidence from sites like the Abri Pataud in France indicates that Aurignacians lived in both caves and open-air camps. They built temporary structures using wood, bone, and hides.
- Geographical Spread:
- The Aurignacian culture spread widely across Europe, from Spain in the west to Russia in the east, and from the Mediterranean coast in the south to as far north as Germany and the Czech Republic.
- This broad geographic range reflects the adaptability of early modern humans to different environments, from the cold, harsh climates of Ice Age Europe to more temperate regions.
- Climate and Environment:
- The Aurignacian period took place during the last Ice Age (Pleistocene), a time characterized by fluctuating cold and warmer periods. The landscape included tundra, steppe, and scattered forests, which were home to a wide variety of megafauna.
- The harsh climate conditions required significant adaptability and ingenuity from Aurignacian humans, which is reflected in their technological and cultural developments.
- Cultural Interactions:
- The Aurignacian culture represents one of the earliest examples of cultural expression in Europe. While the exact nature of the interactions between Aurignacians and Neanderthals is still debated, evidence suggests that there may have been some cultural exchange, particularly in tool-making techniques.
- The Aurignacian is considered a “pan-European” culture, uniting various regional groups under common technological and artistic traditions.
- End of the Aurignacian:
- The end of the Aurignacian around 32,000 years ago is marked by the emergence of the Gravettian culture, which is characterized by new technologies and further advancements in art and tool-making.
- The reasons for the transition from Aurignacian to Gravettian are still studied, but it may have been influenced by climatic changes, shifts in population dynamics, and the further adaptation of early modern humans to the European environment.
Significance of the Aurignacian:
The Aurignacian period is crucial for understanding the early phases of human occupation in Europe and the development of modern human behavior. It showcases the adaptability, creativity, and complexity of early Homo sapiens as they settled in new and challenging environments.
If you have specific aspects you'd like to delve deeper into, feel free to ask!
- φE for 'Environment' that was conducive to human habitation given the level of technological development of the time?
- φAc for Accessibility - how accessible were the resources with that technology?
- φAv for Availability - what resources were available?
New population model identifies phases of human dispersal across Europe
Researchers at the University of Cologne have developed a model that captures the dynamics of human dispersal across the continent during the last Ice Age in unprecedented detail / publication in ‘Nature Communications’
An interdisciplinary research team from the University of Cologne’s Institute of Geophysics and Meteorology and the Department of Prehistoric Archaeology has developed a new model, the “Our Way Model”. They modelled the movements and population densities over time and space during the Aurignacian (approximately 43,000 to 32,000 years ago) to better understand how the first anatomically modern humans populated Europe. The model reveals four phases of the process. The first phase saw a slow expansion of human settlement from the Levant to the Balkans, followed by the second phase of rapid expansion into western Europe. The subsequent third phase was characterized by a decline in human population, and the fourth phase brought regional increases in population density and further advances into previously unsettled areas of Great Britain and the Iberian Peninsula. The results have been published under the title ‘Reconstruction of human dispersal during Aurignacian on pan-European scale’ in Nature Communications.
The interdisciplinary collaboration between climate scientists and archaeologists enabled the team to examine how climate change influenced human dispersal quantitatively. Early anatomically modern humans survived as hunter-gatherers for extremely long periods. When they started spreading across Europe, global climatic conditions were different from today: The prevailing cooler and drier climate of the late Last Glacial Period was repeatedly interrupted by warmer interglacial periods, with some changes occurring abruptly and others gradually.
Reasons for human dispersal to Europe were likely diverse, including human exploratory spirit, evolution in social structure and progress in technology. The newly developed model, however, allowed the research team to clearly demonstrate how climate change impacted human dispersal. Previous numeric models of long-term dispersals of human populations on continental scales commonly relied on so called diffusion-reaction equations, i.e., a combination of slow, continuous dispersal in all directions driven by the constant reproducing and growing population. Agent-based models focusing on individual or group motivations of humans to migrate, in turn, are more popular on smaller scales. Recent new models feature data from paleoclimate models in their calculations, but focus on Net Primary Production, an indicator for the amount of stored CO2 in plants and animals, as a proxy for food availability and human mobility. The disadvantage of this approach is that it does not consider the accessibility and availability of these food sources, as only a fraction of them were usable by humans.
The research team assumes that early habitation in Europe involved highly complex processes of advance, retreat, abandonment and resettlement, driven by climatic changes as well as humans’ ability to adapt. The “Our Way Model” simulates human dispersal in two main steps: first, combining climate and archaeological data to model the Human Existence Potential (HEP), and second, modelling the human population dynamics constrained by the HEP. HEP defines the likelihood of human existence under climate and environmental conditions for a given culture. This vital quantity is estimated using an HEP model that takes into account paleoclimatic data for known archaeological sites. This machine learning approach constructs the climatic constraints for the Aurignacian culture, estimating which climate conditions humans of that culture preferred to live in. The trained model is then applied to estimate the spatial and temporal HEP patterns using data simulated by the so-called Global Climate Model as well as oxygen isotope data from Greenland ice cores.
The results showed that a first phase of relatively slow westward expansion from the Levant to the Balkans (approximately 45.000 to 43.000 years ago) was followed by a second phase of rapid expansion into western Europe (approximately 43.250 to 41.000 years ago). Although interrupted by brief setbacks, Homo sapiens populations now rapidly reached an estimated number of 60.000 people across Europe, spread across all the known archaeological sites during this period. The subsequent third phase was characterized by a decline in the human population, both in terms of its size and density as well as the area occupied by the population (41.000 to 39.000 years ago). This development resulted from a prolonged severe cold period which lasted almost 3.000 years, known as the GS9/HE4 period. However, according to the model, humans survived in the climate shadows of large topography (e.g., the Alpes), which they had just occupied in the previous phase. In the fourth phase, when HEP conditions improved again, the population quickly recovered and grew further, starting at around 38.000 years ago. Regional increases in population density and further advances into previously unsettled areas of Great Britain and the Iberian Peninsula, which the model showed, are broadly in line with the archaeological evidence.
The HEP maps indicate that at the end of this process, parts of the human population were better adapted to cold climatic conditions than others, allowing them to push the boundaries of previously settled environments.
Regional studies can hardly capture all factors at play when trying to reconstruct human dispersal, including how they work together at different scales and contribute to overall long-term trends. This is a major advantage of the new modelling approach.
Dr Isabell Schmidt, co-author
Institute of Prehistory
University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
In further research, the team will test the underlying assumptions made in the model, focusing on the role of cultural evolution in the human dispersal process. The project Human and Earth System Coupled Research (HESCOR) at the University of Cologne will integrate further aspects of Human-Earth system interactions into the model.
Abstract
The Aurignacian is the first techno-complex related with certainty to Anatomically Modern Humans in Europe. Studies show that they appeared around 43-42 kyr cal BP and dispersed rapidly in Europe during the Upper Palaeolithic. However, human dispersal is a highly convoluted process which is until today not well understood. Here, we provide a reconstruction of the human dispersal during the Aurignacian on the pan-European scale using a human dispersal model, the Our Way Model, which combines archaeological with paleoclimate data and uses the human existence potential as a unifying driver of human population dynamics. Based on the reconstruction, we identify the different stages of the human dispersal and analyse how human demographic processes are influenced by climate change and topography. A chronology of the Aurignacian human groups in Europe is provided, which is verified for locations where archaeological dating records are available. Insights into highly debated hypotheses, such as human dispersal routes, are provided.
Introduction
In Europe, the Aurignacian (AUR) is the first techno-complex that can be related to Anatomically Modern Humans (AMHs) that successfully spread to western and southwestern Europe1. Before the AUR, considering the palaeogenetic data from Oase 12, Bacho Kiro3 and Zlatý kůň4, at least two dispersal impulses reached eastern Europe but did not lead to a significant settlement for reasons still unknown5. Only from Bacho Kiro was a small lithic inventory recovered, attributed to the Initial Upper Palaeolithic (IUP). Studies on the Châtelperronian (CHÂT) in northern Spain also indicate a collapse of populations and subsequent recolonisation after the Middle Palaeolithic by the Neanderthal (NEA) groups of the CHÂT6. The situation of the IUP in the Rhone Valley with the Neronian is even more complex. The data from the Grotte Mandrin attributed to AMH7 are contrasted by the findings from the Abri du Maras8, which postulate an attribution of the Neronian to NEAs. In Italy, the IUP complex of the Uluzzian has been connected to AHM due to human remains at one site only9. The term IUP thus vaguely describes a heterogeneous group of lithic inventories attributed to both AMHs and NEAs, depending on region and research team. The technological definition and duration of the IUP are also highly controversial. In contrast, the definition of the AUR is more homogeneous, although it is not free of dispute, providing a solid starting point for a reconstruction of the AMH dispersal in Europe. We therefore deliberately limit our study here to the AUR, but will discuss in the Supplementary Discussion the possible influences of the IUP populations on the dispersal of humans of the AUR in Europe.
Conventionally, the AUR is divided into the Proto, Early, Evolved and Late Aurignacian, but the technological and chronological differences between the first two periods are difficult to distinguish10,11. We follow Schmidt and Zimmermann12 and divide the techno-complex into Phase 1 (AUR-P1, 43–38 kyr cal BP; kyr cal BP hereafter ka), comprising the Proto and Early Aurignacian periods, and Phase 2 (AUR-P2, 38–32 ka), comprising the Evolved and Late Aurignacian periods.
It has been suggested that human groups with AUR technology first appeared in Europe around 43–42 ka13 or earlier and then rapidly expanded during the Upper Palaeolithic14. The origin of the AUR is still being debated and a wide geographical route stretching from the Levant to the Black Sea or even further east has been considered to be possible15. Mellars16 hypothesised that the AUR expansion started somewhere in Turkey and progressed in a major event during the AUR-P1, most likely during interstadial times. Based on the distribution and chronology of the archaeological sites in the Balkan and Upper Danube areas, he proposed approximate Danube and Mediterranean-Coast routes for the east-to-west expansion. Banks et al.17 and Badino et al.18 argued that climate change has been a main driver for the AUR dispersal. Shao et al.19 analysed the best potential paths20 for the AUR dispersal and largely confirmed the routes proposed by Mellars16. However, human dispersal is a highly convoluted process of advancement, retreat, abandonment and resettlement on different temporal and spatial scales. Palaeogenetic data with significantly higher resolution than technological data of the lithic inventories give perspective on this complexity, especially the pre-Aurignacian dispersal of AMHs into Europe. While IUP data indicate AMH dispersal impulses that reached Eastern Europe, but these did not lead to a significant settlement, in contrast to the AUR. The number of generations since the last common admixture event with NEAs is estimated to be about six to eight for Bacho Kiro and Oase3. For Zlatý kůň, the estimate is about 70 generations. This time window of ∼200–2000 years is at the limits of the resolving power of paleogenetic but shows that population changes are as rapid as climate changes on century-to-millennial time scales.
The AUR was accompanied by major climate changes on millennial time scales, as reflected in the Greenland Stadial (GS) and Interstadial (GI) cycles highlighted by the Heinrich events (HEs) and Dansgaard–Oeschger events (D-Os)21. The AUR-P1 fell to the period between HE5 and HE4, while AUR-P2 between HE4 and HE3. The significant differences in the distributions of the archaeological sites attributed to AUR-P1 and AUR-P2 point to the temporal changes in population patterns. So far, our understanding of the techno-complex is mainly based on findings of archaeological excavations. Such data are essential in providing localised insight of an extremely complex picture, but they lack the power for macroscopic and quantitative interpretations of the population dynamics. They are insufficient for answering the basic question how the constellation of climate change and human activity influenced the human dispersal, demography and cultural evolution. Our view is that human dispersal must be considered as the manifestation of the human system which is, in terms of its internal dynamics, characterised by a large degree of freedom and a range of non-linear interactions on different scales, and in terms of external drivers, subject to unsteady and stochastic forcing. To provide quantitative answers to our questions, it is necessary to develop a human dispersal model framework which accounts for the biological, cultural, and environmental dimensions of the human system and integrates human- and natural science theories and diverse data types.
Human dispersal modelling has been active since the 1960s22,23,24,25. For large-scale problems, diffusion/reaction models are commonly used26,27,28. For small-scale problems, agent-based models are popular29. With the advancement in Global Climate Models (GCMs) and their paleoclimate applications, new models emerged by coupling large climate and archaeological data sets for studying climatic impacts on human dispersal30,31. By using a transient GCM simulation for the Pleistocene, Timmermann et al.32 studied the spatiotemporal habitability for five hominin species over the past two million years and reported that astronomically forced changes in temperature, rainfall and terrestrial net primary production (NPP) influenced species distributions. Beyer et al.33 reported that there are special climate windows for human dispersal if a threshold of 90 mm annual rainfall is breached for several decades. The use of NPP as a main driver for human mobility in earlier studies has advantages but also two deficiencies: (1) NPP is a poorly constrained quantity in GCMs; and (2) human existence not only depends on NPP but also on its accessibility and availability.
Here, we provide a detailed reconstruction of the AUR dispersal in Europe using a novel human dispersal model, the Our Way Model (OWM), combined with archaeological and paleoclimate data. In OWM, human existence potential (HEP) is used as a unifying quantity that drives the human population dynamics. HEP encompasses the various processes of the human system and has three layers of information, namely, the climate/environment HEP ΦE, accessible HEP ΦAc, and available HEP ΦAv. While ΦE measures whether climate/environment conditions are suitable for human existence and resources exist, ΦAc measures the human technological and cultural capacity to harness resources. The quantity ΦAv measures whether the resources are available to individual humans and unifies the various mechanisms responsible for human mobility, not only climatic/environmental but also cultural and societal. The OWM is applied to simulating the dispersal of the AUR in Europe for a period of 20 kyr (45–25 ka) to provide a numerical reconstruction of the AUR dispersal history on the pan-European scale, which has not been possible before. Based on the model results, we quantify the spatial and temporal variations of the population density and fluxes, and interpret the AUR dispersal in light of the constellation of climate change and human exploration. A numerical chronology of the AUR dispersal in Europe is provided, which is verified for the locations where archaeological dating records exist. Insights into some of the highly disputed hypotheses, e.g., human dispersal routes, are provided. Note that while the OWM is general, the model parameters used here are specific for the AUR and the HEP data are produced based on the archaeological sites attributed to the AUR. Hence, the model results presented here are also specific for the AUR. However, for simplicity of description, expressions such as human dispersal, human population density etc. are used. It is clear that, unless specifically defined, such expressions refer to the AUR.
Fig. 1: Time slices of simulated population density.
The distributions of density in (P 100 km−2) for a 43, b 42, c 41, d 40, e 39 and f 38 ka are shown. The symbols represent the AUR archaeological sites for different phases (full black dots: Phase 1; open circle: Phase 2; and red triangles: Core sites). The δ18O time series is shown in (g). The times, for which population density is shown, are marked with full red dots. Shaded Areas correspond to interstadial (GI) and non-shaded stadial (GS) times.
Fig. 2: Contours of the arrival time of human expansion in ka, defined by population density reaching 0.4 P 100 km−2 for the first time.
Plotted are also the archaeological sites as explained in Fig 1. The red dots are the archaeological sites (Bacho Kiro, Istállós-kö, Willendorf, Essen-Fischlaken, Arma dell Aquila, Cantabrian, Cova Beneito and Kent’s Cavern) where 14C data (numbers shown) are available for comparison.
Fig. 4: Dispersal routes and population extend.
a Population flux in (P km−1 10 yr−1) averaged over the period of 44–41 ka and the main human dispersal routes, including the Balkan, Alpine-East-Danube, Mediterranean-Coast and West-Europe routes. b Contours of ρ = 1 P 100 km−2 for 40, 39 and 37.8 ka showing the extend of occupation. Today’s topography is shaded grey.
Shao, Y., Wegener, C., Klein, K. et al.
Reconstruction of human dispersal during Aurignacian on pan-European scale. Nat Commun 15, 7406 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51349-y
Copyright: © 2024 The authors.
Published by Springer Nature Ltd. Open access.
Reprinted under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0)
If only the Bronze-Age authors of Genesis had been less ignorant of science, history, geography and geology, they could have produced slightly more plausible creation myths that weren't so easily and comprehensively refuted by practically every decent science paper dealing with any of those subjects.
As it is, they produced a book that requires its believers to be as ignorant as a Bronze Age pastoralist as well. Such a sad waste of human intelligence that retarded western science for the best part of 1500 years until enlightened humanism began to loosen the strangle-hold Christianity had on society and gave us the scientific method.
What Makes You So Special? From The Big Bang To You
How did you come to be here, now? This books takes you from the Big Bang to the evolution of modern humans and the history of human cultures, showing that science is an adventure of discovery and a source of limitless wonder, giving us richer and more rewarding appreciation of the phenomenal privilege of merely being alive and able to begin to understand it all.
Available in Hardcover, Paperback or ebook for Kindle
Ten Reasons To Lose Faith: And Why You Are Better Off Without It
This book explains why faith is a fallacy and serves no useful purpose other than providing an excuse for pretending to know things that are unknown. It also explains how losing faith liberates former sufferers from fear, delusion and the control of others, freeing them to see the world in a different light, to recognise the injustices that religions cause and to accept people for who they are, not which group they happened to be born in. A society based on atheist, Humanist principles would be a less divided, more inclusive, more peaceful society and one more appreciative of the one opportunity that life gives us to enjoy and wonder at the world we live in.
Available in Hardcover, Paperback or ebook for Kindle
No comments :
Post a Comment
Obscene, threatening or obnoxious messages, preaching, abuse and spam will be removed, as will anything by known Internet trolls and stalkers, by known sock-puppet accounts and anything not connected with the post,
A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Remember: your opinion is not an established fact unless corroborated.