(ORDO NEWS) — What happens when an archaeological site turns out to be so unusual that it threatens to destroy everything that the mainstream science of history has held up to this point?
Some discoveries are simply too complex to fully comprehend, and this leads us to question their validity.
Hueyatlaco in Mexico is one such archaeological site, forcing us to reconsider the time frame of human habitation in the Americas.
For a lot. The finds presented at Huayatlaco still cause heated debate among scientists today, but one thing is for sure – there are still many unanswered questions that need to be explored.
Huayatlaco and the mysterious footprints of early man
The Valsequillo pool is located near the city of Puebla in Mexico. Located in the central part of the country, this basin is of great interest to geologists, archaeologists and the entire scientific world.
This interest was driven by the presence of numerous megafaunal remains and evidence of very early human habitation.
Megafauna, as we know it, is a term commonly used for the large animals that roamed the landscapes of the Pleistocene, such as mammoths, woolly rhinos, and cave lions.
However, despite the wealth of important discoveries, this place has always caused a lot of controversy, simply because some of the theories associated with it are very difficult for science to accept.
It has been suggested that early Pleistocene landscapes were characterized by many deep lakes, and that this basin may once have been one such lake.
However, there is no direct evidence for this, and dating has proven to be quite difficult for scientists.
However, the area is of great geological interest because it is dominated by the stratovolcanoes of Popocatepetl and La Malinche and is located in the Trans-Mexican volcanic belt.
As such, it is a place with centuries of history, which also helps shed light on the early human habitation of the region, as geology and archeology often go hand in hand.
One of the first excavations at Hueyatlaco was carried out in 1961, when Professor Cynthia Irwin-Williams carried out extensive excavations there.
Even before her arrival, the region was known as a place rich in fossil animals, which aroused the interest of scientists.
Irvine-Williams was soon joined by other prominent figures from the US Geological Survey, in particular Virginia Steen-McIntyre, who was responsible for popularizing the find and the magnificent discoveries associated with it.
Due to the vast amount of animal fossils, it was generally believed that the site was a killing site where ancient people killed the animals they hunted.
Countless animal remains have been found in the fluvial deposits known as the Valsequillo gravels, which were often flat and exposed in the high cliffs of the Valsequillo reservoir.
Among the fossils of ancient animals found were bison, camel, wolf, peccary, short-faced bear, sloth, horse, tapir, mammoth, saber-toothed cat, mastodon, glyptodon, four-horned antelope and some other species.
But the really important finds came in 1962, when Irvine-Williams discovered animal bones and stone tools together. The ensuing struggle to accurately determine the age of these remains has generated much controversy.
During excavations at Huayatlaco in Mexico, Cynthia Irvin-Williams unearthed animal bones, fossils, and stone tools together. The dating of these remains has caused endless controversy.
The mystery of the earliest origin of man
Among the tools discovered were both very crude and primitive tools, as well as more complex ones, with double edges and detailed scaly construction.
These guns were varied and included fairly complex projectile points, many of which were made from non-native materials.
This was clear evidence that Hueyatlaco had been used by various groups of people over a long period of time.
One way or another, these findings quickly pushed back the previously considered terms of human habitation in South America, which caused conflicts in the scientific world.
Very early on in the excavations, attempts were made to discredit the work done at Huayatlaco, some of which turned out to be outright attacks on the work.
It seems that someone did not like the idea that South America was settled much earlier than is commonly believed.
In 1967, José Lorenzo, of the Mexican National Institute of Anthropology and History, made a controversial claim that the discovered artifacts were deliberately planted at the excavation site in such a way that it was difficult to understand whether they were actually discovered.
This gossip seemed unfounded and sounded much like an attempt to discourage the hunting team from making any further claims at this location.
Moreover, the suspicious activity did not end there. Irvine-Williams made a startling discovery of mammoth bone fragments, which were carved with intricate images depicting various megafauna animals such as snakes and saber-toothed cats.
Similar carvings have been found around the world and are associated with early man.
However, these carved bones disappeared under mysterious circumstances, as if someone did not want them to become public. Photographs of the carving have been preserved.
Virginia Steen-McIntyre working at the Hueyatlaco site in the mid-1960s.
Branded with shame because of the truth because of the results of excavations in Hueyatlaco
By 1969, Irwin-Williams had turned to the scientific community for support and received support from three renowned scientists who visited the site and confirmed that everything was being done in a professional manner.
In the same year, the team published their first scientific paper detailing the progress of the excavation and the importance of the site. And this importance lay in age.
Various methods were used to date the finds, many of which were revolutionary for the time.
Conventional radiocarbon dating has shown the remains to be approximately 35,000 years old. However, uranium dating has shown the remains to be much older, approximately 260,000 years old.
At the time, these results were considered an anomaly, especially since general science suggested a time of 16,000 years before the present for the settlement of the Americas.
Some have speculated that the strata (or geologic layers) were eroded away by ancient waterways and that this may have mixed the samples, leading to such different results.
In 1973, scientists returned to Huayatlaco, hoping to conduct new excavations and try to re-examine the layers and resolve oddities with the dating of the finds.
However, their research led to the conclusion that the layers were not washed out and the samples were not mixed up.
What’s more, this new team was able to analyze the volcanic ash from the site and apply a revolutionary dating method based on the zircon fission track.
Using this geochemical method, they determined that the age of the volcanic ash found in the same layer as the instruments was approximately 370,000-240,000 years old.
This confirmed the extremely ancient age of human habitation at this site and further deepened the mystery that Hueyatlaco was.
Over time, disagreements arose among the members of the team as they could not agree on the age, the direction of the excavation, and the accuracy of the dating methods.
Uranium dating was extremely new at the time, and its reliability was not well known, and the fission dating method had a significant margin of error. Over time, the opinions of the participants in the excavations were divided.
Irwin-Williams believed that the likely age was 20,000 BC, although this view itself was considered controversial by many.
On the other hand, Harold Malde and Virginia Steen-McIntyre, the other leaders of the team, held firmly to the original date of 200,000 BC, which was so revolutionary it was difficult to understand.
Some have suggested that the Irwin-Williams theory of 20,000 years was a “puzzling” and almost deliberate tactic to discredit the find. This was believed mainly because during the excavations no evidence of this age was found at all.
Excavations at Huayatlaco have unearthed stone tools, some of which were very crude and primitive, while others were much more complex.
Being torn apart by the scientific community
Irvin-Williams was never able to substantiate her claims. In fact, she never released a report on the site, raising questions about the honesty of her claims.
On the other hand, another part of the team firmly believed in their theory of 200,000 years and was unwilling to give it up.
In 1981, this group of Malde, Frixell, and Steen-McIntyre published an extensive scientific paper in the Journal of Quaternary Research, which detailed and proved the extremely ancient dating of human habitation at this site.
In their paper, they presented the results of four different dating tests: a fission track, a uranium-thorium test, a mineral weathering study for age determination, and tephra hydration tests.
All these tests confirmed that the age of the remains is approximately 250,000 years old, which supports their theories.
In this regard, the authors wrote in their article:
“The evidence presented here consistently indicates that the age of the Hueyatlaco site is about 250,000 years old.
We who have worked on the geological aspects of the Valsequillo area are well aware that such a long age poses an archaeological dilemma.
In our opinion, the results presented here extend the time frame within which a serious study of human age in the New World would be warranted. We continue to critically evaluate all data, including our own.”
It was an educated, to the point answer, acknowledging that such a radical statement does indeed seem strange, but is not entirely impossible.
The Hueyatlaco story continued to look like a deliberate attempt to discredit these finds or hide them under the rug.
The evidence was clear: early humans could have populated the so-called New World, America, much earlier than is generally believed.
But it seems that someone did not want this truth to be accepted.
To this end, Irvine-Williams, who was at odds with the rest of the team, raised objections on several aspects of the published work, apparently continuing her attacks on the finds.
The team was confident and quickly refuted her attempts to discredit their work.
Soon new mysteries were revealed. Virginia Steen-McIntyre was fired from her job because of her statements, and she also said that some members of the original team were harassed, their careers were in jeopardy, and they were declared incompetent – all because of their participation in the project.
So we have to wonder why these findings have generated such hostility from mainstream science?
Of course, to some, the allegations of such old age may seem radical and hard to believe.
But instead of simply disagreeing with these claims, mainstream scientists have gone to great lengths to attack, harass, and completely discredit the professional work done by the team.
However, new studies have been made over time, providing new evidence and deepening the controversy surrounding the site.
For example, in 2004, researcher Sam Van Landingham conducted an extensive biostratigraphic analysis, confirming that the strata in which the tools were found are about 250,000 years old. In 2006, he once again confirmed these findings.
In his writings, he claims that the specimens can be dated to the so-called Sangamon stage (80,000 to 220,000 BC) due to the presence of several diatom species found only at this age.
New finds emerged in 2008 when paleomagnetic studies were made of volcanic ash layers from the site, dating them to approximately 780,000 BC.
—
Online:
Contact us: [email protected]
Our Standards, Terms of Use: Standard Terms And Conditions.