FAIR releases online videos

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

These citations are all discussing the Loltun Cave, and are all from the book Ice Age Cave Faunas of North America. First, a citation that lists exactly what remains were found:


Page 267

The time range represented is from over 28,400 year BP. Not all taxa are found throughout this long period, but they can be divided into three main groups (Table 10.3). Group I (Holocene and Pleistocene) is formed by those species that occur through most of the stratigraphic sequence, accounting for more than half of the identified of the identified species (n = 39, 57.3 percent). Group 2 (n = 18 species, 26.5 percent) is composed of those species found only in the Holocene sediments. Species that occurred only in the Pleistocene strata constitute Group 3.

Table 10.3 Mammal Species from Loltun Cave Divided According to Their Temporal Record in the Excavation.

Group 1- Holocene and Pleistocene

Didelphis marsupialis, Marmosa canescens,M. Mexicana, Cryptotis, Cryptotis mayensis, Peropteryx macrotis, Pteronotus parnellii, Mormoops megalophylla, Chrotopterus auritus, Glossophaga soricina, Stumira lilium, Artibeus jamaicensis, hiroderma villosum, Desmodus rotundus, Diphylla ecaudata,Eptesicus furinalis, Lasiurus ega I. Intermedius, Nyctinomops laticaudatus, Herpailurus yagouaroundi, Leopardus pardalis, L. wiedii, Puma concolor, Panthera onca, Conepatus semistriatus, Spilogale putorius, Nasua narica, Mazama sp, Odocoileus virginiamus, Pecari tajacu, Sciurus deppei, S. yucatanemis, Orthogeomys hispidus, Heteromys gaumeri, Oryzomys couesi, Ototylomys phyllotis, Peromyscus leucopus, P. yucatanicus, Sigmodon hispidus, Sylvilagus floridanus.

Group 2 – Holocene Only

Philander opposum, Pteronotus davyi, Carollia brevicauda, Centurio senex, Natalus stramineus, Myotis keaysi, Eumops bonariensis, E. underwoodi, Promops centralis, Molossus rufus, Dasypus novemcinctus, Canis familiaris, Urocyon cinereoargenteus, Bassariscus sumichrasti, Procyon lotor, Mustela frenata, Coendou mexicanus, agouti paca


Group 3 – Pleistocene Only

Marmosa lorenzoi, desmodus cf. D draculae, Canis dirus, C. latrans, C. lupus, mephitis sp, Cuvieronius sp, Equus Conversidens, Bison sp, Hemiauchenia sp, Sylvilagus brasiliensis


Note that the only horse bones mentioned are listed as Pleistocene only. Also note the bison bones, which is probably what was originally thought to be cattle bones.

Now, where were the Pleistocene animal remains found? The next citation makes it very clear:

Page 268

The Pleistocene mammal fauna from Loltun Cave consist of those remains from the bottom of Level VII downward and is represented by fifty species (Groups 1 and 3) in forty genera, twenty-three families, and nine orders. This variety is one of the largest from the late Pleistocene of Mexico (Arroyo-Cabrales et al, in press; Kurten and Anderson 1981). Furthermore, it is the most diverse fossil mammal fauna for the Neotropical region of North and CentralAmerica (Fernasquia-Villafranca 1978; Webb and Perrigo 1984).



There was only one citation that made the dating of the horse bones seem questionable, and it certainly wasn’t placing them up in level V. This citation does not contradict the above citations, because we already know the scientists say that the demarcation between the Pleistocene era and the Holocene era could be in the bottom of Level VII. This would be around 9,500 BC.

264
To date, a comprehensive publication on the site has not been produced; however, several studies have reported on some of the important findings from the excavations by INAH. These findings include layers with ceramics and lithics, and layers with only lithics in association with extinct animals. These ceramic lithic layers are important for assessing the purpose and lifestyle of the first human beings that occupied the Yucatan Peninsula. Other studies cover lithic morphology and typology (Konieczna 1981), and biological remains, such as mammal bones (Alvarez and Polaco 1972; Alvarez and Arroyo-Cabrales 1990; Arroyo-Cabrales and Alvarez 1990), mollusk shells (Alvarez and Polaco 1972), and plants (Montufar 1987; Xelhuanzi-Lopex 1986).

It is clear that Loltun Cave is an important site because of the presence of lithic tools and Pleistocene fauna, though doubts still exist about the stratigraphic and temporal associations. The presence of Pleistocene Equus conversidens in ceramic layers has been interpreted as possible proof of the survival of the extinct horse into the Holocene (Schdmit 1988).


Level VII is a ceramic level, and we already know that the animals were at the bottom of Level VII. There is uncertainty as to whether the demarcation between the Pleistocene and Holocene eras would be in Level VIII or at the bottom of Level VII. The rest of the citations in this book accept the placement of the demarcation in Level VII.

Now could this be evidence of the horse in the Book of Mormon time period? Nonsense. This is like Sorenson’s earlier statement that supposedly finding pockets of extinct animals surviving into 8,000 BC would constitute evidence for the Book of Mormon. We are still talking about many thousands of years prior to the Book of Mormon time period.

Now I have no idea what Sorenson read in Schmidt that made him think there were horse remains in Level 5 and above, but I sure would like to see it, because the authors of THIS book, who obviously also had access to Schmidt's research, certainly did not draw that conclusion.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Zakuska
_Emeritus
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:58 am

Post by _Zakuska »

beastie wrote:Make up your mind. You've clearly been implying that maybe the jaredites or nephites brought horses with them on their ships, and those horse remains would look like a modern, post-conquest, horse, unless they were carbon dated. Are you now shying away from your theory? If not, then you might as well believe in the global flood and two of every single animal on the face of the earth tucked up in a big ole' boat, because it would require about the same level of divine intervention to work. Here's one reason why - (from my book Horses Through Time, page 99:


No need to make up my mind Beastie... I said nothing about a Localized flood, vs a Global FLood. Or some Flood type event in the past. (Eg. What washed all those extinct animal bones into the cenote so they all could be neatly deposited all in the same level?) ;)

When the Spanish followers of Christopher Columbus arrived in the Americas after 1492, their most effective weapon against the native civilization was their ability to move rapidly on horseback. The ships of all the voyages were loaded with horses, but so many died during the sea crossing that the part of the ocean between Spain and the Canary Islands was called the Gulfo de Yeguas (Gulf of Mares) in later times. The part of the Atlantic Ocean just east of Mexico that is infamous for its ceaseless calms became known as the Horse Latitudes, possibly because so many horses died while the ships waited for the breeze to stir. Despite the hazards at sea, by 1503 there were sixty to seventy horses on the island of Hispaniola.


Theres another way to interpret this Beastie...

Did they die... or where they killed and eaten? While all those scervied men sat under the sun days on end waiting for the breeze to stir?

Besides the fact that it was difficult for professional ship builders and sailors to get horses to the New World alive, your theory has another very ugly problem. While you and other believers may hop and skip around trying to prove the slightest, slimmest, possibility of a horse in the New World, you cannot deny that, for whatever reason, this horse remained unknown to the natives and unused. So why in the world would that be? If the Israelites, as some point, brought horses WITH them, they would certainly know how to USE them, and would breed them and teach the natives to USE them. Once the horse arrived in the New World, after a brief rough start, they reproduced like wildfire and within fifty years there were over 10,000 in the area of Queretaro (again, my book Horses Through Time).


If you remember correctly... the Jaredite dishes where "driven by a continuous breeze from the Lord to their destination". Now who isn't following the Narative?

You see, the reasons apologist devise strange theories about tiny little horses that couldn't really be ridden is to try and compensate for this fact - while you may play with history in terms of bones, you can't play with history in terms of the native american's history with THE HORSE. Your theory allows no possible loophole for why this "modern horse" wasn't use in exactly the way it was used in the Old World by the very people that brought it over with them.


How about ponies that grew on the way over? Do you really think King Lamoni drove his chariot using Clydsdales?
Last edited by Guest on Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:05 am, edited 3 times in total.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

No need to make up my mind Beastie... I said nothing about a Localized flood, vs a Global FLood. Or some Flood type event in the past. (Eg. What washed all those extinct animal bones into the cenote so they all could be neatly deposited all in the same level?) ;)


The above lists were from the cave, not the previously mentioned cenote. Cenotes were popular places to deposit sacred items for the gods - like sacrifices. Even children's bones have been found in cenotes.

And if you don't believe in a global flood with a big ole' boat, then why the heck did you bring it up to begin with?


Theres another way to interpret this Beastie...

Did they die... or where they killed and eaten? While all those scervied men sat under the sun days on end waiting for the breeze to stir?


This wasn't during prehistoric times, before the written record, zak. Horses were cherished by these sailors/soldiers more than the other human beings on the voyage. They were worth their weight in gold.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

Zak...

I'm thinking your theories are getting more and more ridiculous. (smile)

Dating or no dating, I think it is time to give this one up.

Either confirm Sorenson wasn't just making stuff up, or acknowledge to your fellow apologists that he was way off base on this one. ;-)

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_Zakuska
_Emeritus
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:58 am

Post by _Zakuska »

TD,

I can't really comment until Chris provides us with ALL the pertinent information.

So far the only thing I can see that Sorenson may have mistated in his Schmidt Analysis is saying the charcoal came from somewhere between VII and VIII. I think he was kind of mixing the facts that Schmidt couldn't tell if VII or VIII was the bottom of the Plestocene, and the Charcoal got mixed up in there. But we can't really say one way or the other until we have ALL of the inrofmation. For example where does Sorenson get a list of where horse remains where found in Layers VII - II? Those parts of the Dig haven't been presented nor has the discusion on how they derived at what part of the level the charcoal came from.
_Zakuska
_Emeritus
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:58 am

Post by _Zakuska »

I is a ceramic level, and we already know that the animals were at the bottom of Level VII. There is uncertainty as to whether the demarcation between the Pleistocene and Holocene eras would be in Level VIII or at the bottom of Level VII. The rest of the citations in this book accept the placement of the demarcation in Level VII.

Now could this be evidence of the horse in the Book of Mormon time period? Nonsense. This is like Sorenson’s earlier statement that supposedly finding pockets of extinct animals surviving into 8,000 BC would constitute evidence for the Book of Mormon. We are still talking about many thousands of years prior to the Book of Mormon time period.

Now I have no idea what Sorenson read in Schmidt that made him think there were horse remains in Level 5 and above, but I sure would like to see it, because the authors of THIS book, who obviously also had access to Schmidt's research, certainly did not draw that conclusion.

I noticed the page number... Is this what was "originally reported" or what we know now? Again you are crucifying Sorenson out of context. As well as not paying attention to RAY... if you want to prove Sorenson was "incompotent" like you have claimed earlier or that he was "Lieing for the Lord" you've got a long ways to go!
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

I noticed the page number... Is this what was "originally reported" or what we know now? Again you are crucifying Sorenson out of context. As well as not paying attention to RAY... if you want to prove Sorenson was "incompotent" like you have claimed earlier or that he was "Lieing for the Lord" you've got a long ways to go!


Oh, no, my primary intent isn't to prove Sorenson's incompetent or lying. As far as I'm concerned, I (and others) proved he's incompetent or lying a while ago.

My primary intent right now is to explore this particular reference/claim.

For all I know, Schmidt really DID say something that made Sorenson attribute the summary to him he did. I really don't know. We already know that caves are difficult to excavate and often the strata are confusing. And we know that Mesoamericans, like all human beings, sometimes did keep ancient things as artifacts. As far as I'm concerned, as long as the remainder of the evidence is as conclusive as it is, it's not evidence of anything other than just those two things.

I do know that the current text I'm citing, that depends on more studies than just Schmidt, has arrived at an entirely different conclusion than Sorenson did.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Oh, and I wanted the poll to be specific about HORSES.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Zakuska
_Emeritus
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:58 am

Post by _Zakuska »

Beastie,

Lets break this down and take this slow...

First it isn't Sorensons Summary we are arguing over... its DCPs.

Daniel C. Peterson and Matthew Roper

http://maxwellinstitute.BYU.edu/display ... iew&id=531

Incidentally, horse bones were also found in association with cultural remains at Loltun Cave in northern Yucatan. There, archaeologists identified a sequence of sixteen layers numbered from the surface downward and obtained a radiocarbon date of about 1800 BC from charcoal fragments found between layers VIII and VII.66


66 Peter J. Schmidt, "La entrada del hombre a la Península de Yucatán," in Orígenes del Hombre Americano (Seminario), comp. Alba González Jácome (México: Secretaría de Educación Pública, 1988), 253. We would like to thank John L. Sorenson for providing us with a copy of this reference.

[/quote]

This sentence was written by Dr. Petersen. Lets Analize it...

1) It says Horse Bones where found in association with "Cultural remains" Your source says the same thing.
2) 16 Layers = Your Source says the same
3) A carbon date of 1800BC = Your Source = the Same

So Far So Good...

4) DCP says Fragments = Your Source says 1 Fragment
5) DCP says between Layers VII and VIII = Your Source Says on Layer VII

So who is right.... the Only way to tell is the Orígenes del Hombre Americano. I hope that is on Chris's LTT list.

Significantly, forty-four fragments of horse remains were found in the layers VII, VI, V, and II—above all in association with pottery. But the earliest Maya ceramics in the region date no earlier than 900–400 BC.67


Ibid.


6a) These two sentences are also from DCP. But the foot note is on the second sentence.
6b) So Apparently on the same page in the Orígenes del Hombre Americano it says something about Mayan ceramic in the region dating to 900-400 BC. Only the Orígenes del Hombre Americano can tell us. Im not sure where DCP comes up with 44 Fragments in those 5 Layers, but even Your source says Horse bones where found in association with Pottery in those upper layers.

Archaeologist Peter Schmidt notes,

What clearly results is that the presence of the horse, Equus conversidens, alone is not sufficient evidence to declare a stratum totally Pleistocene given the long series of combinations of this species with later materials in the collections of Mercer, Hatt and others. Something went on here that is difficult to explain. [Difficult to explain, that is, in light of current theories about the extinction of the pre-Columbian horse.] If a late survival of the horse and other Pleistocene animals is postulated as an explanation of the situation, it would have to be extended almost to the beginnings of the ceramic era, which will not please the paleontologists.68


68 Ibid., 255, translation by John L. Sorenson.


7) You can verify how good a translator Dr. Sorenson is right here.

Notice Schmidt is talking about the trouble of declaring wether these lower Layers are Plestocene, and the Presence of "Equus conversidens" in these Layers is not sufficient evidence to definatley declare them as Plestocene. Your source even verifies that Equus conversidens are in these layers. But Schmidt himself specifically mentions the remains found by Mercer and Hatt and "OTHERS" as possibly pointing to the presence of these 44 specimens in Layers II - VII.

The point here is, simply, that the question of pre-Columbian horses is not closed. That's all. And it seems to us that Professor Sorenson's caution here is better grounded than Larson's certainty.69


69 On this side issue, Sorenson claims: "Nowhere have I ever claimed that 'horses' in the sense of Equus equus (the horse as we know it colloquially) survived from the Pleistocene down to Book of Mormon times. My position has always been that other animals could have been termed 'horses' in the English translation of the Book of Mormon yet that perhaps a true Equus form survived down to 'historical' times. The FARMS Update of June 1984, 'Once More: The Horse,' ended with the appropriate qualification (penned by me) to which I still adhere: 'A careful study of the reported remains . . . ought to be done. Radiometric dating might also be worthwhile. Full references to related material will be furnished to any qualified person who desires to carry out such a study.' No such study has yet been done, regardless of the confidence with which establishment scholars may claim that late survivals were impossible. They have never examined the relevant scientific evidence." Sorenson to Peterson, 23 April 1996.


So whats the score soo far?

1,2,3 are verified by your source

4 we only know of 1 wood fragment. Where did DCP get the Idea that there was more than 1 (See 7)
5 Our wood fragment was in Layer VII. Where did DCP get the idea of more charcoal down to Layer VII? (See 7)

6b I think can only be verified with Orígenes del Hombre Americano

6a I think Schmidt in Orígenes del Hombre Americano gives us the key to where DCP gets the 44 bones specimens in Layers II-VII from...

7 ...Mercer and Hatt and "OTHERS"...

Apparently Mercer Hatt and others found 44 specimens in those upper 5 layers. As well as carbon fragments plural? That is what we need to be focusing on... the Mercer and Hatt and Others Finds.
Last edited by Guest on Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:42 am, edited 3 times in total.
_Zakuska
_Emeritus
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:58 am

Post by _Zakuska »

Beastie,

Here is something else I think you missed... from your source...

beastie wrote:
Page 267

The time range represented is from over 28,400 year BP. Not all taxa are found throughout this long period, but they can be divided into three main groups (Table 10.3). Group I (Holocene and Pleistocene) is formed by those species that occur through most of the stratigraphic sequence, accounting for more than half of the identified of the identified species (n = 39, 57.3 percent). Group 2 (n = 18 species, 26.5 percent) is composed of those species found only in the Holocene sediments. Species that occurred only in the Pleistocene strata constitute Group 3.

Table 10.3 Mammal Species from Loltun Cave Divided According to Their Temporal Record in the Excavation.

Group 1- Holocene and Pleistocene

Didelphis marsupialis, Marmosa canescens,M. Mexicana, Cryptotis, Cryptotis mayensis, Peropteryx macrotis, Pteronotus parnellii, Mormoops megalophylla, Chrotopterus auritus, Glossophaga soricina, Stumira lilium, Artibeus jamaicensis, hiroderma villosum, Desmodus rotundus, Diphylla ecaudata,Eptesicus furinalis, Lasiurus ega I. Intermedius, Nyctinomops laticaudatus, Herpailurus yagouaroundi, Leopardus pardalis, L. wiedii, Puma concolor, Panthera onca, Conepatus semistriatus, Spilogale putorius, Nasua narica, Mazama sp, Odocoileus virginiamus, Pecari tajacu, Sciurus deppei, S. yucatanemis, Orthogeomys hispidus, Heteromys gaumeri, Oryzomys couesi, Ototylomys phyllotis, Peromyscus leucopus, P. yucatanicus, Sigmodon hispidus, Sylvilagus floridanus.

Group 2 – Holocene Only

Philander opposum, Pteronotus davyi, Carollia brevicauda, Centurio senex, Natalus stramineus, Myotis keaysi, Eumops bonariensis, E. underwoodi, Promops centralis, Molossus rufus, Dasypus novemcinctus, Canis familiaris, Urocyon cinereoargenteus, Bassariscus sumichrasti, Procyon lotor, Mustela frenata, Coendou mexicanus, agouti paca


Group 3 – Pleistocene Only

Marmosa lorenzoi, desmodus cf. D draculae, Canis dirus, C. latrans, C. lupus, mephitis sp, Cuvieronius sp, Equus Conversidens, Bison sp, Hemiauchenia sp, Sylvilagus brasiliensis


Note that the only horse bones mentioned are listed as Pleistocene only. Also note the bison bones, which is probably what was originally thought to be cattle bones.


Tell me.... why is the "Bison" listed right next to your bolded "Equus Conversidens" in the Pliectocene Era? We have Bison here in Utah on Antelope Island Alive and well today. Yet no Bisons apear in the Holcene Era. Did the Spanish Bring Bison across the Atlantic Ocean as well?

What does this Data actually tell us? The Bison Migrated North perhaps? So if the Bison survived the Holcene to present why couldn't the horse?
Post Reply