>

Well I agree. It's still a really young field. For example, I graduated undergrad in 2008 and I learned absolutely nothing about Denisovans. We are learning things all the time. It's actually really exciting, and kind of a shame, because I don't think we'll have all the answers in my lifetime. But as we understand it, there does seem to be an overarching framework, but it does feel like we fill in gaps every couple years or so.
As in proto species of humans sharpening obsidian material from volcanoes into axes 1.2 million years ago? Impressive fr >

As in they found the workshops where they made weapons for the white walkers >

Haha remember when the White Walkers were actually considered a threat? >

Barely an inconvenience >

The battle lasted less than an average workday for me >

Hey, it could have been longer if we didn’t have a massive brain fart and cavalry charged a horde of undead zombies that have no thoughts and don’t care to get trampled.
Dumbest shit ever….. >

Also that Calvary 100% were just brought back to life. 
“Hey! We know we are incredibly out numbered, all the odds are against us. But what if we give them our Calvary to use against us?”
At least the scene looked great. I think. Was kinda hard to see it. >

I saw the flaming swords and was like “a bit too early but okay”… and then they charged into it….
It killed all hope I had for the ending. >

“All without protective gloves” or, alternately, using hand-crafted leather gloves that rotted away to dust some time during the last million years or so. >

Where is prehistoric OSHA to lay down the law? >

Proto-human manager put a poster up in the proto-bathroom. What more do you want? >

Unions ? >

Proto unions just want you to pay your proto union dues. >

One obsidian axe per month >

And I hear proto Frank Zabatka is in league with the Greek. Dangerous stuff. >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 82%. (I'm a bot)


Reporting on the latest findings from the Melka Kunture archaeological site in Ethiopia, a team of researchers has described the discovery of an obsidian handaxe workshop within a layer of sediment dated to 1.2 million years ago.
This represents a staggeringly early example of obsidian shaping, and, according to the study authors, is the only handaxe factory ever dated to the Early Pleistocene.
When describing tools from over a million years ago, the study authors say that "The standardized obsidian handaxes provide ample evidence of the repetitive use of fully mastered skills."


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: obsidian^#1 researchers^#2 handaxe^#3 Stone^#4 tools^#5 >

So a bot decided what the best sentences are to summarize the point of the article? That’s kind of amazing. >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 75%.  (I’m a bot)


I luv cock.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: I^#1 luv^#2 cock^#3 >

I was unsure but once I read the extended summary, “I luv cock” finally started to make sense >

Is there a pic of the Axe anywhere? >

I wonder if archeologists ever sort of freak out when holding something that old. Maybe I'm just that much of a history nerd, but I would be having a bit of an out-of-body experience holding a 1.2 million y/o axe head made by pre-modern humans. >


I wonder if archeologists ever sort of freak out when holding something that old. 

They absolutely do. My Grandfather was a geologist who got me into fossil hunting and I've run into many real archeologists and paleontologists over the years who all pretty much think like this: You are touching something that hasn't moved or been touched in X years and are the first one to see it do so. It's mind blowing for some people and I personally love finding fossils in situ where I can revel in my imagination of how the place I am standing looked millions of years ago. >

When I visited the Grand Canyon thats something the tour guide pointed out that stuck with me. That so many people for tens of thousands of years looked at it and were probably like "oh wow, thats a big hole". >

Sometimes I look at someone and think "wow, your gene pool hasn't evolved for millions of years". >

You need to keep away from those mirrors and do some mindfulnessing. >

a million fuckin years ago? existential crisis incoming >

What have you done with your life? [/glares]
Edit: To those downvoting: this was clearly meant in jest.  Hit a little close to home for you? >

I know these would've been early-ass-humans
But I've always suspected in a non-tinfoil-hat way that human civilization extends further than we really know or suspect.
Not like 'oh we were super advanced' I just think maybe we've been building stuff for longer than the oldest stuff we've found and that we've been forming complex groups for way longer.
My thoughts always been if advancement is exponential, then there must be a huge long tail end on the early part of history that only 8,000 years (ish?) Is far too small to represent fully.
EDIT: I'm not interested in speculation about aliens building the pyramids. I'm talking about concrete factual achaeology and anthropology, not bad sci-fi peddled by a hack. Sorry. >

These wouldn't have been humans, they would probably have been Homo Erectus or another similar hominid.
I have an anthropology degree from undergrad, and I'm actually super opposed to the Graham Hancock-esque idea that there were advanced civilizations that we've lost. But I do agree, I believe there are threads of human culture that go back before the development of "modern civilizations" in the last 8000 years.
Having said that, they really did explode in a short amount of time. You can track Europe for example, and it only developed agriculture relatively recently. We can actually reach back to the threads of some modern civilizations, the Greeks developed late, for example. I don't think we hit milestones that were "lost". The pace of development really did explode like that. >

Yeah of course, I'm not disputing the agricultural explosion, you're definitely more qualified on it all than I am. However it does occur to me that agriculture was discovered in parallel but separately in different parts of the world, correct me if I'm wrong though. 
I am definitely leaning stronger into what you said about the threads of culture, I just think that these big movements in tech have long fuses before they explode.
I guess I'm just saying I think development has a phase of being drawn out in a phase of discovery before it catches like flame. It doesn't seem unreasonable to imagine a group of people leaving food behind only to come back and find a bunch of grain or berry bushes a year or two later, and then turning to lean on that in hardship.
Why does it have to be: "They didn't.. until they did."? >

I would actually tend to agree with you and that idea about some things; like culture, language, craftmaking, etc - for example the beautifully woven clothing on Otzi. I also agree with the general idea of there being a long time of buildup before something becomes apparent in the archaeological record (and in fact, I think this concept applies to a lot of things before the age of audiovisual recording, which I think 1,000 years from now might be even more revolutionary to human studies than writing).
But for agriculture specifically, it really does appear to have started once, and then spread and diffused. For example, and I should warn you I'm not an expert and this isn't my area, but I believe that agriculture started in the Middle and Near East about 4,000 years before it made it to Northern Europe.
Also, there are some historical examples of "regression", so to speak. Britain was inhabited by a paleolithic group of people before the last freeze-over (And while these numbers could be wildly wrong from memory, I think it's like 50,000 BC), that had a certain refined and complicated way of crafting stone axe heads. But during the next, neolithic population event (ca. 10,000BC ?) the replacement group had much more rudimentary stone crafting. And yet, that was the first group of inhabitants in the modern chain.
Edit: But I don't believe there was some sort of, Assassin's-Creed-like early "super-civilization" that had all sorts of technologies that are lost to the sands of time. There really is, overall, a pretty recognizable chain of development that tends to coincide in various places. 
If anything, I think "we" (and perhaps I mean we in the Anglosphere) aren't paying enough attention to development in civilizations in the Indus, Yellow, and Yangtze river valleys. Some estimates have 100,000,000 people living in northern China during biblical times, which is almost mind boggling. >

Yes, this. And those regions are why Im personally a bit skeptical that it all started exactly in one spot, although I have to conceede that its the accepted theory and theres strong evidence for it all and I can't in good conscious say that its absolutely wrong. Also that the origins of agriculture we see in the earliest known civilizations are likely predated by the original 'event' that resulted in agriculture (its discovery?). 
There has been the sort of fragments of evidence found in those cradle regions you mentioned that suggest super early super advanced farming. Albeit this is my anecdotal memory here so youd have to confirm. But it essentially suggests the middle east wasnt the only hotbed, but (especially in China) much more research and looking needs to be done.
Ill put it this way, I'd be surprised if by the time agriculture 'officially' spread to say the Yellow River valley, that they didnt already have some semblance of an idea how to farm. Maybe not 'farm' but 'grow to forage for ones self'. All this being said I'm not the person to argue definitively, I'm just speaking on gut suspicion. I do realize the cradle civs did come after the discovery of agriculture though. >

Well, one thing I would say, is that the idea of farming, and indeed the practice of farming existed before the agricultural revolution started. The idea wasn't simply sowing and harvesting seeds, but finding a combination of crops (possibly beans and legumes), plus domestication of animals that provided other proteins, that provided enough of a coverage of amino acids that tribes of people could afford to give up being semi-nomadic and support themselves by staying in one place. Hunter-gatherer diets were actually really nutritious, but didn't allow time for other social activities like crafting various tools, weapons, buildings, or artifacts. 
And that process, by iteration, would only improve over time. So of course, there would have been centuries of practice with different crops. But in theory, once a group of people stumbled upon a combination that worked, it could be copied fairly quickly. It's not as if the idea of crop management itself had to be explained to each new group of contact. >

Wow! I never cease to be amazed by peoples knowledge. It makes a lot of sense what you're saying, and I feel goofy for not realizing the depth it truly entails. I guess I could've summarized it by saying I've always felt that many things are more fluid in human history than just it starts here and now. But I realize now how it really goes without saying in most ways, and just like anything else you have to see everything, big picture, to fully understand.
Thank you for sharing and engaging in this with me, I learned something! (And after further research I have to eat my crow and say I do feel more in-line with what you're saying. I still think the history of it all does need more research though, we just dont know enough overall!)