Mike Ruggeri Reports

Keeping an Eye On Archaeology News & Events

New Ancient Americas Archaeological Discoveries and the Critiques

    Recently, I posted the news of an amazing discovery of ancient rock art found in the Colombian Amazon. You can see the post here: <http://michaelruggeriancientamericas.tumblr.com>.

    And as soon as I posted the story, the critiques came pouring in. The critiques were centered on these observations:
    1) It is impossible to date rock art so the 10,500 BCE date cannot be correct.
    2) The Peruvian team were not the first researchers to see this rock art; indigenous people had already seen it.
    3) The rock art site was seen by researchers decades ago.
    4) The site is not as long as the new researchers say since there are gaps in the paintings.
    5) There are much newer rock art depictions at the site which bring us right up to post-colonial times.

    New and striking archaeological discoveries need critiques to point out possible errors in the description of the discovery and even the scientific basis behind the claims made by researchers. As an example, when the first scientifically verified Pre-Clovis site was found at the site of Monte Verde in Chile, critiques from the archaeological community flooded the archaeological world. The Clovis First community would not accept that their theories of the First Americans could be challenged. Others pointed out discrepancies in the proofs made by the research team led by Tom Dillahey. It took 20 years to verify the discovery after many international teams went to visit the site over many years to try to disprove the Pre-Clovis dates at Monte Verde, and finally, the Clovis First idea was proven wrong.
 

    In the article, it states that the research team dated the paintings by finding the remains of human meals at the site which included the remains of extinct animals dating back to 10,500 BCE. So those stating you cannot date rock art did not read the article that closely.
 

    Of course indigenous peoples in the Americas saw these paintings first, just as they saw all the pyramids first, later found by modern researchers. The team did not say that indigenous people were unaware of these paintings.
    Yes, researchers saw these paintings decades ago but no research papers were published as a result. This team are the first to do so.
    Yes, there are gaps in the paintings. The researchers did not say there were not.
    Yes, there are much newer rock art paintings contained in these murals. And again, the researchers did not say there were not.
    But the new research found the remains of human consumed meals dating back to 10,500 BCE, and they pointed out that some of the paintings are so high, humans could not reach them without some device. And they found these wooden tower murals which explain how these ancient peoples reached those heights for their paintings. This is ground-breaking.

    So often modern critiques are based on a misreading of the reports and biased assumptions that needlessly criticize new findings with critiques that are simply not valid.

    The real critiques will come from the professional community when the team publishes their research. And those critiques will be made and answered, which is important in the scientific method.