Saturday, January 28, 2023

COOKING WITH GAS NOT DANGEROUS, FAKE SCIENCE IS!

ln a mindless, knee-jerk response to a “scientific study” claiming that cooking with gas stoves causes a  12.7% increase in asthma in children our doctrinaire, ideologue, new Governor, Hochul of NY State, quickly  proposed a ban gas stoves in new home construction and added legislation to ban gas stoves in restaurants and other areas. The “ban gas stove craze”  has recently  cropped up everywhere. 


What was the source of this nonsense? Anyone who has taken an elementary chemistry course knows that when you properly  burn natural gas or propane in a Bunsen burner  ( in the lab),  or a cook stove in the kitchen, the results of complete oxidation of fuel is  heat,  light, carbon dioxide and water.  The cone of unburned gas ends in a sharp blue cone where oxidation takes place to generate a bright hot flame. No smoke, no particulates, no pollutants.  Improper burning by restricting oxygen, can cause a smokey flame which may generate small amounts of particulates, unburned fuel, and various aerosols, but such effects would be transitory and vey limited and extremely unlikely to cause disease or asthma. 


How did such disinformation or pseudo science get so much play in the media? 


Some of it my have come from a 2018 Australian study: (Damp housing, gas stoves and the burden of childhood asthma in children, by L.D. Knibbs, et al. In: Med J Australia, 2018.)  The authors report that  26 % of Australian homes have dampness problems and 38% have natural gas as their main energy source for cooktop stoves. 


They conclude that exposure to “damp housing, and gas stoves is associated with a considerable proportion of the childhood burden of asthma”.  Let us ignore the warning to all novice scientists that “association or correlation is not causation”. 


But using their own figures and contorted logic it is also true that more of the 26% of Australian homes which have dampness problems, (100-38= 62)  or 62% do not use gas,  and many may use electric cook stoves, or some other means of cooking. They too are associated with increased asthma.  It seems from these data that it is the dampness factor rather than the cook stove fuel which may be the source of increased asthma.   So using their figures and logic one can also conclude that electric cook stoves are an even greater source of correlation or association with the rate of asthma than gas stoves.


It is well established that dampness in homes create an  environment which may encourage  growth of molds yeasts and fungi, and the spores of these plants can cause irritation  and asthmatic  effects.  Dampness is likely the cause of observed increases in asthma.   So why did the “scientists” erroneously single out gas stoves?  I can not claim knowledge of the motives of the group cited above, their motives may be pure science…but some others have obvious ulterior motives to deceive. 


Deprecating the use of fossil fuels, such as gas or petroleum is a recent “cause celebre” of the progressive, ideological agitator, propagandist, zealot crowd of climate partisans.


The progressive agenda is to reduce use of fossil fuels. That goal is paramount. Even the  prostitution of “science” in pursuit of a desired end… even by illegitimate means… is sanctioned by the climate obsessed crowd. The ends justify the means for this subversive group. 


This is a very dangerous trend.  Science seeks truth, and does not contort itself to support some pre-established conclusion.  


Are we returning to the days of the “Roman Inquisition” when all scientific inquires could only conclude that the  Earth was at the center of the solar system…not the sun?  Galileo was sanctioned, imprisoned and silenced for claiming otherwise. That was in 1633!  Some, like Gov Hochul  are attempting to return us to those dark days..as they claim they are “following the science”.








 

Saturday, January 21, 2023

ELECTRIC VEHICLE DOWN SIDES


At a Ford dealership lot, I recently came across the new 2023, Ford 150 “Lightning”.  It’s a big good looking truck, a crew cab model, with a short bed.    It looked just like all the other new Ford 150s on the lot.  The difference is the “Lightning” has no gas tank or fill cap.  It was, as its name suggests……all electric. There is no growling, big v8 engine under the hood, only more storage space up there behind the shiny front grill .  


I peered through the tinged glass at the information sheet taped to the inside of the passenger window.  Price: $98,000.00 and with the sales tax and other charges I mentally calculated that you would have to fork over well over $100 Gs to drive this truck home.   


The information sheet also indicated that the battery-driven Lightning had a range of 230 miles! Not bad on one charge. So I thought. 


I imagined myself in the Lightning taking  the “Great American Road Trip”. Like taking my family up to see my mom in Buffalo.  Not possible! Buffalo is 380 miles away.    Too far for the Lightning.  I could imagine the vehicle slowing down and coming to a dead stop on some barren stretch of highway.  Then what?


What about taking my daughter up to  Binghamton College?  I could pack all her clothes, books, shoes, her tiny refrigerator, cardboard boxes, and other “necessaries” for a college junior in that capacious short bed. My smiling, happy family would fit neatly in the commodious crew cab.  Binghamton is only 181 miles away.  That’s doable!   So I thought.


On arrival at Binghamton (If I could somehow afford a Lightning), I figured (230-181 = 49) I would have only about 49 “miles” left on the battery!  


The truck salesman, seeing me at the Lightning window —mistaking me for a well-heeled potential customer—sidled up.  


“Looking at the Lightning eh?  It’s a great vehicle,” he opined. 


 “That’s quite a good distance on one charge…” I said, pointing to the window sticker.


He smiled, “That there  ‘230 mile range’ is only  an estimate”. Don’t depend on it.”  Adding, “You might make the 200 miles, but don’t  use up too much electricity on air conditioning, radio, wifi, and all them “creature comforts” in that lux cab, and certainly  don’t turn the head lights on, if you don’t need ‘em.”  


So I figured I’d probably make it to Binghamton, if I started very early in the morning. No headlamps required! But I would need a quick recharge someplace. Where could I get to in Binghamton, with less than 20 miles left. Even finding the nearest McDonald’s or Burger King might use up that much battery power. 


I turned to read more on the window sticker . “Oh! I see here a full recharge will require 11.9 hours at a standard 120 volt recharge station”.  


“Yeah if you could find one” added the salesman.  


I wandered off among the lanes of shiny new trucks in deep contemplation. 


I wondered about availability of recharge stations in Binghamton.  Were there any up there?  I checked on this using my iPhone Google.  I discovered there are 11 charge stations in Binghamton. But the “likes” comments on the “net” were not too reassuring.  


Users up there reported that cables at some stations were frayed.  The surrounding locations at others were too dangerous (crime happens all over) to sit around for hours waiting for a recharge.  A common complaint was availability!  Many of the charging stations at a site were in use too often.  


With many parents traveling to this location and local student’s and other folks up there driving electric automobiles as well, the likelihood of finding an open charge point carried with it a large “uncertainty” component that would make any traveler uneasy. 


Even if I could find an open charge point, where was I going to stay (and the happy family too) for the near 12 hour recharge?  


Obvious conclusion: Amazing technical achievement for Ford.  But for me: ‘Lectric’ too expensive, too uncertain recharge, too short a range.


Another thought too.   If you were motivated to buy an all electric vehicle because you are committed to “save the planet from global warming”…think again.  At the present time 80% US electric power is produced by burning fossil fuels. Only 20% is generated by renewables like hydro, wind and solar.  So wherever you go to recharge you will be using energy to run your vehicle that has been largely produced by fossil fuel anyway.  


Any of that 20% carbon savings you are making this sacrifice for the “planet’s health” would be complicated and compromised in this way.  


1.Your old fossil fuel truck—had a big carbon footprint just in its construction and transport phase—abandoning it and replacing it with a “new” vehicle which has at least as large a construction carbon footprint is simply doubling your impact on the planet’s carbon load. 


2. Then too there are the batteries.  Those lithium batteries require a huge amount of fossil fuels to produce—(and 80% are made in China, which uses mostly coal as a fuel). The construction  of one Tesla auto battery results in dumping 16 tons of carbon into the atmosphere. While driving a Ford gas or diesel truck might add about 5 tons of carbon to the atmosphere per year.  You would have to drive the new electric four years to come out ahead.  


3. But this calculation ignores the old abandoned fossil fuel truck still on the road with another owner, burning fossil fuels and still dumping its resulting 5 tons of carbon per year.  Or it might be rusting away as an eyesore in some abandoned field as it slowly oxidizes away.  


Saving the planet is more complex than most folks think. 

Friday, January 20, 2023

JOE BIDEN’S LAST SCANDAL?

Joe Biden, the “top of his law class”, “the Big Guy”, a stentorian, “touchy-feely”Senator, and  Obama’s VP, has always been a politician plagued with scandals, like plagiarism, “pay for play” deals, loose-lip-gaffs, nepotism, and just having a penchant for screwing up anything he touches. Then too he has been a “divider” President— his domestic policies divided his own nation into opposing camps, and his foreign polices divided the world by reactivating the Cold War, dividing East and West.

As proof of that ability to screw things up. Biden’s first term, so far, has been an unprecedented series of disasters, both domestic and foreign.It began with the chaotic, deadly, yes scandalous, retreat from Afghanistan. That was followed with Biden’s response to the Ukraine War (a corrupt nation in which he and his family have entangling financial interests). The Ukraine strategy has failed horribly. When war threatened in Ukraine, he ignored the signs of disaster. Abandoning any semblance of senior diplomat and world leader Biden made no attempt at peace by diplomacy.  He handed over that powerful position for diplomacy to well-intentioned, but weak “bit players” like President Macron of France. 


His apparent weakness in Afghanistan, his abandonment of diplomacy, his verbal gaffes and failure to act, helped spur the Russian invasion. His post invasion polices only expanded, intensified and prolonged the worst European military confrontation since WWII.  Biden’s Ukraine war brought the world closest to the first real threat of nuclear war in 50 years. The WHO is now recommending  that nations stockpile anti radiation drugs. 


Biden’s collusion with the corrupt Zelenskyy administration feeds the greed of the Kyiv elites who are profiting ($100 billion US dollars so far) from the war.   Continued US cash largess only discourages interest of these corrupt officials in diplomatic solutions.   Biden’s unwise, divisive foreign strategy is using Ukraine as the bloody point of a military spear in a misguided plan to weaken Russia. Such an outcome would destabilize all of Europe. Then in regard to a humanitarian issue, his foolhardy policy has led the poorly led Ukrainian people into a bloody, un-winable war of attrition, uncounted lost lives, financial disaster and massive destruction of their nation’s infrastructure.  Then too building Ukraine into a highly militarized state may lead to a dangerous virtual “military monster”  in Central Europe. An entity  which may become a potential threat to the weakly militarized EU nations. 


Biden’s unwise thoughtless use of sanctions (mostly against Russia, Iran and North Korea)  has cut off oil and gas supplies to Europe, jacked up world gas and oil prices, increased fuel scarcity, and caused  inflation in those European nations dependent on cheap Russian fuels. Inflation has spiked to 20% in the EU and threatened a world recession. 


At home his unwise “green policy” impetuously cut production of fossil fuels which led to a 100% spike in oil and gasoline prices, which initiated our first monetary inflationary spiral in 40 years.  His so called “more humane”  but heartless  and immoral “open border policy” has encouraged a chaotic flood, a virtual invasion of millions of illegal immigrants, and an unprecedented increase in human and drug smuggling in which Biden is, in effect, acting as co-conspirator with the Mexican drug and human smuggler cartels.  


His domesticl “woke” policies have spurred criminal violence not experienced in our cites in decades and  encouraged racism, and spurred the social division of the nation.  

 

But just recently, President Biden has finally been outed as not only a divisive, incompetent leader,  but a hypocrite as well. After several months of posturing as the “responsible“ President, we’d learn he has his own classified document scandal.  


We now know that the FBI raid on Mar A Lago, purportedly to recover classified documents (claimed as “personal ‘declassified’ documents” by Trump and kept there under lock and key) was a politicized raid in a Biden effort to use the Justice Department as a cudgel against his political nemesis.  While the ugly Florida raid was taking place, and former President Trump was being pilloried mercilessly by Biden as “irresponsible” and a “security threat”, few knew —other than Biden and his top attorney- that Biden himself, had  a score of his own classified documents carelessly laying around his many offices and  homes, where the nation’s secrets  were exposed to Biden family, casual visitors, foreign business partners, a drug addict, and many others.  This revelation was hidden from the public prior to the November 2 elections.  Perhaps that effort to hide evidence of wrong-doing by the President, just before and election and continued silence for 68 days, had its desired pro-Democrat effect on voters during the 2022 election cycle. 


While Biden was pointing the finger of shame at his predecessor, his six year old  classified docs, holding  the nation’s secrets were carelessly exposed  in unguarded cardboard boxes in the garage of his summer home,  and in an unlocked adjoining “storage” room.   More were found in similar disarray and lack of oversight in his long abandoned private office at equally unsecured Pennsylvania State University.   These facts as longs as they were hidden from the public did not discourage President Biden from making lugubrious, hypocritical public comments regarding the terrible “irresponsibility” and lack of “seriousness” of his predecessor in regard to “national security”. 


Rather than the armed FBI agents pawing through the underwear drawers  of the former First Lady and the bedroom of young Baron Trump, Garland’s FBI agents permitted Biden to assign  his own attorneys to collect his carelessly secured classified docs.  No FBI agents “hoovered” up, Biden’s personal papers then purposely strewed them  across a private office floor  to be photographed and  leaked to the press, in a crude attempt to suggest that this was the “irresponsible”manner in which they were found—-as the FBI  did at Mar A Lago.


Instead of the heavy handed overreach of the Garland Justice Department at Mar A Lago, Biden’s six year old, more egregious, more likely compromised classified document scandal, hidden for nine weeks from the public, was treated very differently.   Early in November, just before the elections, the Biden team decided to trash Biden’s lip service to “transparency” hoping the scandal would be “deep sixed” and forgotten, like all the other of Biden’s scandals and transgressions have been by the biased news media.   


One  wonders where were the government archivists?  Did they know these documents were not secured for six years?  Does that suggest that they may have been removed without authority?  Stolen?  Also why, and  what right, and for what purpose did Biden remove them from their rightful location?  Then move them again several times, each time compounding the illegality.  Furthermore, they were found outside of their “classified” envelopes, suggesting their contents had been compromised, and the nation’s secrets exposed to potential malefactors.  That is likely, since Joe’s “secret documents” were kept in an unsecured garage, abandoned university office, which was regularly accessed by unknown and uncounted  visitors, including the President’s son Hunter Biden, who is presently under investigation, among other charges as an unregistered foreign agent. 

 

This document scandal is the last straw for Biden.  His attempt to hide his incompetence, divisiveness, his perfidy, his hypocrisy, his lies and his attempts at weaponizing the government, and the Justice Department against a political opponent will stick to Joe. He will not run again. It’s over for Joe. 


The classified document scandal is Joe’s last.


Now how do we clean up the mess he made? 












Thursday, January 19, 2023

HOW AND WHEN DID NATIVE AMERICANS GET HERE?

How were the Americas first populated? 

Columbus sailed his small fleet west into the New World in 1492.  At his first landfall, after two months at sea, Columbus states he encountered  “people..of good height, of pleasing appearance and well built” (See: Log of Christopher Columbus , October 12, 1492.). It was not a surprising encounter for Columbus or his crew.   Columbus mistaken assumed he was sailing along the coast of the Far East, perhaps off the cost of ”Chipangu” (Japan),  or the “Indies” where large human populations existed.  He simply assumed the natives he encountered were people of the East (or in Spanish: “Indios”).   

For over two hundred years, at least since the trading voyages and travels of Marco Polo in the second half of 13 century, Europeans had known of the people of the Far East. (And perhaps Europeans knew of China and its people even earlier. For in 166 AD, Chineses account record that the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelia sent a Roman emissary to the the Emperor Huan of the Han Dynasty in China. ) .  

Columbus, who was so wrong about his ship’s longitude and his location on the Earth’s surface,  was correct in thinking these natives were “Indios”.  (Columbus mistakenly assumed he was off the coast of Asia (at about 138 deg W, while his actual location was only about 74 deg W).  His location on October 12, 1492  was 64 degrees of modern longitude off course. In his defense, in Columbus’ day there was no accurate way for mariners to determine longitude. Various scholars had several estimates of this figure.  The Greek philosopher Eratosthenes was very close to modern calculations.  But the estimate Columbus used for  the value of a degree of longitude, or the actual  circumference of the Earth, was about 37% too small.)

It is ironic that Columbus  was correct in his assumption about the “Asian” character of the natives he encountered on the island of San Salvador and the rest of the New World.  For we now know that the Americas were peopled by prehistoric hunters arriving from the east.  Modern archaeological studies have now confirmed these theories. 

However assured Columbus was of the Asian character of the “Indios” he encountered , the first serious scientific investigation concerning the origin of Native Americans had to wait many hundreds of years. Even up to the late 19th and early 20th Century the North American  archeology establishment considered human occupation of North America could not have occurred before @ 1000 BC, or about 3000 years before the present time (BP).  

THE FOLSOM SITE (11,000 years BP) 

But soon after the turn of the century, in 1908, an African-American, buffalo hunter and  cowboy in northern  New Mexico would change all that.  After a particularly severe August rain storm, George McJunkin, an ex-slave, working as the cattle ranch foreman on the Crowfoot Ranch near Folsom,  New Mexico rode out to Wild Horse Arroyo, part of the drainage basin of the Cimarron River of northern New Mexico, to check on the longhorn herd in that section of the ranch.  An arroyo, is a normally dry, narrow canyon, in which water flows only very infrequently. Though after heavy rains in the upper regions of the drainage basin will cause violent torrents  of muddy water to rush down these narrow gorges and deeply erode the stream bed and cause the walls of the arroyo to collapse.  Arriving there, McJunkin made an interesting observation.  The rainstorm and subsequent erosion has washed out the canyon wall, exposing deeply buried soil and within it a mass of unusual bones.  

McJunkin was an experienced cattleman and Buffalo hunter who quickly realized that the bones were too big, and buried too deep, to be those of domestic cattle, or even the wild formerly numerous  native Buffalo (Bison bison).  The exposure of ancient bones peaked the curiosity of the cowboy.  When McJunkin examined them more carefully, he discovered several unusual stone points among them.  He made a small collection of what he found and returned to the ranch. Later that, year he attempted to interest the local New Mexico scientific community about the site, but to no effect.  

Finally, ten years later, in 1918, he sent some of the bone and the unusual stone points to the Denver Museum in neighboring Colorado.  Archeologist Harold Cook of that institution agreed to join McJunkin in New Mexico to collect bones, and more of the distinctive points at the site.  Cook did make a formal collection and museum acquisition file and may have realized that he had evidences of human artifacts associated with the bones of a long extinct buffalo species, but  may have been hesitant to publish his preliminary findings. At that time, (prior to radiocarbon dating techniques first developed in 1946) the archeology establishment centered in museums in New York and Washington DC were convinced that there were no verifiable human evidences in North America older than about 3000 BP.  Archeologists claiming otherwise would be  harshly attacked. Critics would be quick to claim that such “”unconventional evidence” was tainted. Without C14 dating such claims could be readily discounted as a the result of disturbance by animal burrowing, or earth movements, which, as a result of gravity, mixed younger human-crafted  artifacts with more deeply buried and much older extinct mammal bones. The charges from the establishment might even suggest that the site was “salted” and accuse the archeologist of unprofessional behavior.  Cook realized he would be putting his reputation on the line without firm proof that the extinct animal bones and the ancient bones were truly contemporaneous. Thus the collected evidence remained in the Denver Museum, gathering dust.  

It was not until 1926, when Jesse Figgins, took over the post as director of the Denver Museum, He was an experienced and professional archeologist and polar explorer with many contacts with eastern museums in Washington and New York. It was at Figgins’ direction that the Cook-McJunkin collection was re-examined. The unusual stone points in the collection stirred the curiosity of Figgins.  He directed an excavation team to the site, and with his team, he  carefully and methodically excavated. His efforts paid off with a major discovery. 

In 1927 Figgins concluded that the site was a marsh-side, kill-site, where 32 extinct buffalo (Bison antiguus) had been killed by prehistoric hunters who used distinctive stone points on their hand spears or atlatal darts. The unusual points have a characteristic “flute” or shallow groove which often runs nearly the full length of the leaf-shaped, concave-based, finely pressure-knapped, microcrystalline quartz artifacts. Figgins realized  that he had a significant find because these distinctive human artifacts were intimately related with the remains of a species of buffalo that had become extinct some 10,000 years ago.  

The startling evidence of this conclusion was uncovered when during the excavation, Figgins and his associates came upon a fluted, Folsom point fragment ( its base and tip having been shattered) lodged between two bones of the fossil rib cage of the extinct buffalo skeleton.  Figgins secured irrefutable evidence of this by removing intact the portion of the fossil rib cage, while  leaving the stone point in situ between the rib bones. This excavated feature with fractured stone point intact was returned to the Museum and became the irrefutable first evidence of stone artifacts made by humans, found in close association with evidences  of extinct mega fauna known to have become extinct some ten thousand year ago. 

Figgins eventually dated the site from about 11,000 BP to 10,000 BP terming it the Folsom Site, the type site for the Folsom Tradition, a paleo-Indian cultural site. This site  established the fact that ancient humans of the Late Pleistocene  (129,000 BP to 11,700 BP) were living in North America and hunting large game animals thousands of years before previously thought.  Americans clearly lived in North America during the latter stages of the Ice Age and they hunted large game with specialized stone points.

WHERE DID THESE PEOPLE ORIGINATE? 

What route did they take to North America? When did they first arrive? 

It was a Jesuit priest, Father Jose de Acosta, SJ (1539-1600) a theologian, anthropologist  and missionary to Peru, who after a long stint as a missionary in  Peru wrote a survey in 1590 of the New World, and its relation to Europe, based on his many years as a missionary in South America. His work, entitled:Historia natural y moral de las Indias,  proposes that native Americans arrived in the New World by way of a northern land bridge from Asia. 

Although De Acosta’s work became a primary source for academic study of the western part of South America, his hypothesis was ignored for more than 300 years.  That is until 1936, when a Swedish botanist, Eric Hulten (1894-1981) published his doctoral thesis.  Hulten, in preparation for his doctoral candidacy, found close relationships between  the plants of Siberia in Russia, and those of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands in North America.  His doctoral thesis concluded that during the Pleistocene, an ice-free land bridge, he termed “Beringia” existed between Siberia and Alaska. It was over this land bridge which Asian tundra plant species dispersed from Asia into North America.   

Not long after this, anthropologists and archeologists, now armed with the fact that humans were hunting megafauna in northern New Mexico as late as 11,000 years BP had a possible ice free route through which paleo-hunters  may have traveled.  Beringia, the 600 mile wide ice-free region where a marine climate limited snow fall, and where tundra species survived the Ice Age, could be the route ancient humans might have used to pass from Asia to North America.   These new evidences made the 16th century de Acosta hypothesis all the more likely.  The “out of Asia across the tundra plains of Beringia and to North and South America” hypothesis became a popular theory— at least for several decades.

THE CLOVIS SITE (11,500 BP)

Only ten years later, and about 220 miles south of the Folsom site an even older paleo Indian site, (about 500 years older) was discovered in 1936 at Clovis, New Mexico.

In 1936, at a previously known paleo Indian site at Clovis, New Mexico, Blackwater Locality #1 archeologists unearthed two mastodon skeletons.  Among the fossil mastodon bones the excavators recovered four distinctive Clovis stone points associated in situ with these two skeletons, as well as two bone points made of mastodon long bones, cutting tools made of flake fragments, and a core for a Clovis point.  Nearby other ivory and bone tools were recovered. Radiocarbon dates gave a 11,500BP to 10,800 BP date for the site. 

The Clovis stone points are beautifully well crafted, fluted, leaf shaped, bifacial, pressure-flaked spear points, generally longer than Folsom points. The flute is formed on both sides and extends only partway up the blade (unlike the Folsom point). The base of the point is “eared”. The point structure and size suggests that is was used as a spear point, for thrusting into the body of a large game animal rather than as a point for a throwing dart (for an atlatal dart) as was the Folsom point.   Other Clovis sites have been identified in other areas of the USA, in Mexico, Central America, and in northern South America. At these varied sites evidence indicates that the  Clovis hunters were exploiting megafauna such as mammoths, Bison antiguus, mastodons, gomphotheres, sloths, tapirs and other smaller game. 

The Clovis tradition lasts several hundred years then seems to disappear. It is commonly assumed that the Clovis “people” or their tradition  died out, perhaps as a result of the decline in the herds of Pleistocene megafauna, such as mammoths, mastodons and other huge, ungainly beasts for which their hunting implements were well adapted. ( These animals died out as climate change proceeded and as the climate moderated and  glaciers retreated.). These Clovis hunters may have been replaced with the people of the Folsom culture (smaller points more likely used as the points on atlatl darts). This change from the Clovis points seem a weapon adaptation to exploiting more agile, more mobile herds, in particular those  of the extinct giant bison (Bison antiguus) which appear to have replaced the earlier megafauna in the changing landscape.

But the Clovis site revealed not only an older cultural tradition and the most unique and beautifully crafted points. The Clovis site had human genetic evidence too.  The only human remains ever recovered at a Clovis site occurred at the Blackwater 1 site. There the skeletal remains of an infant boy, was recovered.  More recent analysis of the DNA of the remains, termed “Anzick 1”, revealed genetic relationships  to modern Native American tribes of the southern tier of  states, as well modern native populations in Central and South America.  Also detected we’re genetic ties to populations in  Central Asia as well as Siberia.  These data strongly support the theory that the settlement of the Americas occurred  via Beringia, or by way of a Pacific coastal route


COOPER’S FERRY, SALMON RIVER SITE (16,000 BP)

The oldest paleo-Indian site in the Americas, one which seems to support the Pacific costal route hypothesis, was recently discovered far from New Mexico, in north western  Idaho. The Cooper’s Ferry Site is found on the Salmon River near the confluence of the Salmon and Snake Rivers. Just further east the Snake flows into the Columbia River— which drains almost directly west into the Pacific Ocean.  (See: NW News 8/29/19, Tom Banse “Beside an Idaho River, signs of the oldest human presence in the Americas”.)

A University of Oregon team of archeologists has discovered distinctive stone points, stone tools, animal bones and charcoal buried deeply  in fine sediments described as glacially derived loess. The loess deposits within which the artifacts are found were formed by and are  related to continental glaciation of the region. These loess deposits  are themselves dated to between 40,000BP to 10,000 BP (See:  “Timing of Late Quaternary Glaciations in the Western United States Based on the Age of Loess on the Eastern Snake River Plain, Idaho”, by Forman,Steven, et.al, Camb Univ Press, 1/20/2017). 

The site has revealed evidences such as small (0.5 inch to 2 inch) points of the  Western Stemmed Point Tradition, hammer stones, stone blades, stone cores, modified flakes perhaps used as burins or cutting tools, fire cracked rock, and bone with evidence of butchering marks.  The preserved carbon at the site has been reliably carbon-isotope dated at between 14,000 to 16,000 years ago. The fine textured, glacially derived loess sediments in which the cultural evidences were found, no doubt helped preserve the chemical and physical integrity of the evidence. 

The site location is on a river drainage system linked it to the Pacific coast via the Columbia River. The age of the evidences all point to the likelihood of the earliest immigrants into the Americas moved down the Pacific coast. Along the coast they came upon coastal river systems which they followed inland. Following the course of the Columbia River east  from the Pacific Ocean to the approximate site of the Cooper Ferry site is an approximate  distance of about 425 miles (@684 km).  Modern walkers following such a   route might take only about 47 days.   (Based on: Average hikers take about 7 months to hike the 2000 miles of Appalachian Trail, or @286 miles per month, or about 9 miles per day, 425/9= 47)  

During the time period, 16,000 years ago, the Beringia land bridge remained ice free, but passage into North America was still blocked by great  walls of ice associated with the the Alaskan and Canadian continental glaciers.  The Cooper’s Ferry site as well a the human genetic evidence from the Clovis Blackwater 1 site seem to strongly support the theory that the earliest immigration into the Americas must have followed a Pacific coastal route, and then moved inland along the river systems into the Americas.

Other than the strong evidence for carbon dating, the cultural evidences found here are not overwhelming.  The excavators found  very limited evidence of megafauna or toothed animal bone, or tools to suggest the hunting of megafauna. They recovered small, (one half inch to 2 inch long) crudely formed stone points commonly found elsewhere in the inter-montane west, as well as fire cracked rock, stone tool debitage,  pits for food storage (?) and as noted above, importantly they recovered charcoal able to be dated.  

These evidences seem to suggest a less specialized hunting strategy, and cultural traditions much different than the later Clovis and Folsom cultural traditions. They are clearly those of  specialized megafauna hunters.  Why were no megafauna hunted at Cooper’s Ferry?   Perhaps the Copper’s Ferry people left  evidence of a less specialized,  more generalized cultural, hunting and exploitation tradition.  Perhaps these developed elsewhere, perhaps in Siberia or Bereingia or along the Pacific coast route, and were carried inland, eventually to Cooper’s Ferry.  Only later did these new Americans adapt to hunting megafauna? 


 









 







(* Log of Christopher Columbus , October 12, 1492.)

Monday, January 2, 2023

RUSH TO JUDGEMENT IN IDAHO?

In the last days of 2022 Americans have learned (viz: the Twitter Scandals) just how controlled their sources of information are.  As a result, one can not blame thinking citizens for questioning just about everything they read or hear.  The lack of confidence in what their government, the FBI, the legacy press or the media tells them infects other, perhaps innocent sources of information.  These days one is even driven to questions the motives and pronouncements of the tiny Moscow Police Department in far off Idaho. But current events give us cause. 

As a scientist and observer of the political seen—this author— is disconcerted to see such a headlong rush to judgment in the USA regarding the murders in Moscow Idaho.

We do not know enough about the evidence against  Bryan Kohberger the only suspect in the tragic and horrible murders of the four Idaho University students to agree or disagree with the media and others who seem to have concluded that this person is guilty with no corroborative evidence.. Few even describe him accurately as the  “suspect” or “alleged” killer.  

The indictment  against Kohberger will not be opened perhaps for weeks, so the evidence against Kohberger will remain unknown. So an appropriate and constitutional approach to this case should be that the Moscow Police —without providing any information on what evidence they have—have arrested a suspect….still presumed to be innocent. That seems a difficult task for our modern day press and media practitioners to swallow. 

But there are reasons to feel uncomfortable.

Moscow, Idaho is a small city, more of a town really, with only about 26,000 inhabitants.  It is the epitome of the small college town, where a university dominates the economy.  When Christmas/New Year break is over (in a week or so) some 8,500 students will surge back into Moscow to again fill up the university campus—-and as well the local pubs, hotels, restaurants, bars and shops.  When the University is in session one out of every three town residents is a student. A huge (30%) portion of the population. 

The fact that the Moscow Police, with the State Police and the FBI, up to now, have been unable to find even one “suspect” in the last seven weeks of their investigation, must have weighed heavily on the University, it’s staff,  and the town that depends on University students for their economic survival. 

The Moscow Police must have been under intense pressure to find “someone….some suspect” before the end of the holiday break.  For if they did not, it was very likely that many worried parents would be hesitant about sending their young sons or daughter back to Moscow, where a lunatic knife-wielding killer was still on the loose—somewhere.  The result of that parental fear would be a sharp decrease in enrolled students, and an enormous negative impact on the economy of Moscow and the University . 

By arresting Kohberger, just before the end of the holiday, the Moscow Police have avoided the problem of frightened parents keeping their children home, and the potential scarcity of deep-pocketed students in town. A calamity that would have caused  the near collapse of the Moscow economy.  

The suspect will linger in prison in Pennsylvania for a while, his indictment will not be opened until well after classes have begun again, eventually the Moscow Police and the FBI will finally release the evidence they have against him.  But by then students would have returned. 

Is our 2020-2022 disbelief in all government veracity, competence, and authority misplaced?  Have we become so hardened by the corruption in DC that we even question the good guys of the local Moscow police force? 

Let’s hope, there is hope for honesty somewhere in the USA.

But what is the evidence against Kohberger?  That is the question. 

Has there been a rush to judgement for small-town economics?