Proof of mammoths and horses alive 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.

[rjw]

Hi one and all,


A really interesting one posted by SteveF at TR.

It looks as if, rather than relying on bones to track down among the last survivors of mammoths and ancient horses, researchers looked for signs of these animals by searching for their DNA in frozen soil. From:-

Late-surviving megafauna exposed by ancient DNA in frozen soil

with the actual scientific paper at:-

Ancient DNA reveals late survival of mammoth and horse in interior Alaska — PNAS


From the first link:

After plucking ancient DNA from frozen soil in central Alaska, a team of researchers used cutting-edge techniques to uncover "genetic fossils" of both species locked in permafrost samples dated to between 7,600 and 10,500 calendar years.

From the PNAS paper itself:-

Causes of late Quaternary extinctions of large mammals (“megafauna”) continue to be debated, especially for continental losses, because spatial and temporal patterns of extinction are poorly known. Accurate latest appearance dates (LADs) for such taxa are critical for interpreting the process of extinction. The extinction of woolly mammoth and horse in northwestern North America is currently placed at 15,000–13,000 calendar years before present (yr BP), based on LADs from dating surveys of macrofossils (bones and teeth). Advantages of using macrofossils to estimate when a species became extinct are offset, however, by the improbability of finding and dating the remains of the last-surviving members of populations that were restricted in numbers or confined to refugia. Here we report an alternative approach to detect ‘ghost ranges’ of dwindling populations, based on recovery of ancient DNA from perennially frozen and securely dated sediments (sedaDNA). In such contexts, sedaDNA can reveal the molecular presence of species that appear absent in the macrofossil record. We show that woolly mammoth and horse persisted in interior Alaska until at least 10,500 yr BP, several thousands of years later than indicated from macrofossil surveys. These results contradict claims that Holocene survival of mammoths in Beringia was restricted to ecologically isolated high-latitude islands. More importantly, our finding that mammoth and horse overlapped with humans for several millennia in the region where people initially entered the Americas challenges theories that megafaunal extinction occurred within centuries of human arrival or were due to an extraterrestrial impact in the late Pleistocene.

(In part, I just could not resist the stir. Nevertheless, this is interesting in its own right and besides, isn't it amazing just what folk will do in order to test ideas, in this case, by searching for ancient DNA buried in the frozen landscape.)


Regards, Roland

 

[SithDoughnut]

I know there's been a lot of debate over how and when the mammoths became extinct, and exactly where they lived, hopefully this paper might lead people to some more solid conclusions. I'll have to read it later.

 

[AV1611VET]

My, oh, my.

Another "proof of" thread, starting out with the phrase:

Causes of late Quaternary extinctions of large mammals (“megafauna&#8221 continue to be debated...

With such "proof", how can we do anything but debate it, eh?

 

[AV1611VET]

I know there's been a lot of debate over how and when the mammoths became extinct, and exactly where they lived, hopefully this paper might lead people to some more solid conclusions. I'll have to read it later.

But this is "proof" we're talking about.

 

[SithDoughnut]

But this is "proof" we're talking about.

I'm going to ask you a question. Don't take it as an insult, it's an honest question: Do you understand what proof is? If you do, you should understand why what you posted is wrong. The proof in the OP shows that mammoths and horses were alive between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago and that is it. The debate ranges from where they lived to how they died. Do you understand how this evidence does not solve the entire debate by itself?

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

There were woolly mammoths aboard Noah's Ark.

Like the giants, mammoths were still alive as late as 2000 B.C.

Vartanyan, S.L., Radiocarbon Dating Evidence for Mammoths on Wrangel Island, Arctic Ocean, Until 2000 BC, Radiocarbon, Volume 37, Number 1, Pages 1-6, 1995

Stuart, A.J., et al., The Latest Woolly Mammoth's (Mammuthus Prigenius Blumenbach) in Europe and Asia: A Review of the Current Evidence, Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 21, Issues 14-15, Pages 1559-1569, Feb 2002

Schirber, M., Surviving Extinction: Where Woolly Mammoths Endured, Live Science, Oct 2004

Mammoths Hung on Longer? Late-Surviving Megafauna Exposed by Ancient DNA in Frozen Soil, Science Daily, Dec 2009

 

[SithDoughnut]

Like the giants, mammoths were still alive as late as 2000 B.C.

And that disproves that they were alive from 6,000 to 10,000 years ago how?

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

And that disproves that they were alive from 6,000 to 10,000 years ago how?

LOL.

You don't seem to understand what has been posted.

I am agreeing with the OP and then some.

 

[SithDoughnut]

LOL.

You don't seem to understand what has been posted.

I am agreeing with the OP and then some.

Ah, okay. That makes sense

 

[rjw]

My, oh, my.

Another "proof of" thread, starting out with the phrase:With such "proof", how can we do anything but debate it, eh?

What you need to do AV is read past the first few sentences and get to this at the end:-

(In part, I just could not resist the stir. ...

Then you contemplate the title which has the words 6,000 and 10,000 in it, understand that "proof" is a concept that creationists and IDers generally have real problems understanding, and consider the fact that I am an atheist who seems to understand his science and philosophy of science tolerably well.

After pondering these points, maybe the "I just could not resist the stir" will come into focus a bit more.



Regards, Roland

 

[AV1611VET]

After pondering these points, maybe the "I just could not resist the stir" will come into focus a bit more.

You mean it's a Poe?

If so, my apologies.

 

[Molal]

Actually AV brings up a good point. Proof in science does not exist. Proof is only for liquor and mathematics.

I cringe whenever I see the word proof in a scientific discussion, but I do fall short and use it myself...in moments of weakness

It's the weight of evidence that exists....nothing in science is ever proven beyond shadow of doubt.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Actually AV brings up a good point. Proof in science does not exist. Proof is only for liquor and mathematics.

I cringe whenever I see the word proof in a scientific discussion, but I do fall short and use it myself...in moments of weakness

It's the weight of evidence that exists....nothing in science is ever proven beyond shadow of doubt.

God bless you...

 

[rjw]

You mean it's a Poe?

If so, my apologies.

A bit of a Poe, AV1611, a bit of a Poe.

The science articles are real enough. It's just how I dressed them up with my wording.

You were not the only one to comment on that. A few evos had a dig at me too for using the word "proof". I found myself explaining it to them as well.

So no need for apologies. Perhaps I should apologise, but then I really was having a dig at your side of the fence, and highlighting an interesting article in the process.


Regards, Roland

 

[SpaceMadness]

There were woolly mammoths aboard Noah's Ark.

Like the giants, mammoths were still alive as late as 2000 B.C.

Vartanyan, S.L., ]Radiocarbon Dating Evidence for Mammoths on Wrangel Island, Arctic Ocean, Until 2000 BC[/url], Radiocarbon, Volume 37, Number 1, Pages 1-6, 1995

So now radiometric dating does work? Make up your mind!

 

[firechild_82]

I'm sure we're all well aware now that radiometric dating is valid only if it agrees with the bible.

 

[rjw]

I'm sure we're all well aware now that radiometric dating is valid only if it agrees with the bible.

And welcome to CF firechild_82.


Regards, Roland

 

[rjw]

So now radiometric dating does work? Make up your mind!

And given that AoS only believes what he observes, then I wonder who observed that which he presumably believes?


Regards, Roland

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

I'm sure we're all well aware now that radiometric dating is valid only if it agrees with the bible.

Correct.

And given that AoS only believes what he observes, then I wonder who observed that which he presumably believes?

Historical peoples did the observing.

Wonder harder.

 

[rjw]

Correct.


Historical peoples did the observing.

Wonder harder.

Wot?

Since you did not see these things, then von Daniken saw aliens build the pyramids? He saw spaceships land at Nazca? He saw aliens build walls with blocks that razor blades cannot fit between?

And do you believe everything historical people wrote, just because they wrote it?



Regards, Roland