Read an Excerpt
Out of Australia
Aborigines, the Dreamtime, and the Dawn of the Human Race
By Steven Strong, Evan Strong Hampton Roads Publishing Company, Inc.
Copyright © 2017 Steven and Evan Strong
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-61283-393-4
CHAPTER 1
THE "FIRST RACE"
Over the last decade, all manner of unexpected archaeological discoveries have led to many experts questioning much of what was assumed to be fact. A large variety of unexpected findings have called into question many elemental assumptions held about the past. These include the discovery of little "hobbits" on Flores Island; Siberian hominids with mtDNA connections to the people of Papua New Guinea (PNG); and the purity of our distinct genetic Homo sapiens code being compromised by a Neanderthal component of 4%.
Professor Clive Gamble of Southampton University succinctly summarized the current impasse and polarization this has caused, when declaring we have to construct "a completely new map of the world and how we peopled it." Granted, our response to Gamble's call may seem radical; however, these discoveries, found not only in America but throughout the entire Indo-Pacific Region, all point to the same ancient southern location as the key to the new cartography.
After extensive consultation and research, we are of the opinion that at some time in the distant past, no less than 50,000 years ago and possibly much earlier, Original men and women set sail from Australia and began exploring foreign lands. They were the bearers of new insights and options, and bequeathed humanity their genes and the cornerstones of a genuinely civilized civilization: religion, culture, gender equality, art, sailing, democracy, astronomy, and surgery.
Australian Original guardians of traditional Lore and Law have made it clear to us that they are indeed the "First Race." Over the millennia the First Australians watched as other nations and lifestyles emerged and squabbled, but they always kept themselves apart, rejecting all societies focused upon the individual or the material. They were not, as assumed by some of the general public, ignorant savages stagnating in a state of primitive inertia. As highly respected Dhungutti Elder, Rueben Kelly, stated, their role was to maintain an esoteric presence in a world increasingly blinded by bright lights and all manner of material temptations. "Centuries ago you white people chose the path of science and technology. That path will destroy the planet. Our role is to protect the planet. We are hoping you will discover that before it's too late."
Unlike others out in the field or laboratory, the authors of this book have "discovered" nothing: our role is to act as scribes and faithfully present the history of the Original Elders. The rest is easy: find white-fella proof to substantiate black-fella truth.
Before we can begin to paint the canvas depicting ancient Australia's true heritage, it would be best for us to try to tear down the screen of the Out-of-Africa theory (OAT) which has kept it hidden from sight for so many years. According to academics and archaeological texts, Africa is the place where modern humans evolved before spreading their genes throughout the continents. OAT has, over the years since it was first proposed, been transformed from a hypothesis into a fact. One of the original papers that lay claim to charting our ancient ancestor's movements and origin "The Recent African Genesis of Humans" was written by Professors Alan Wilson and Rebecca Cann and was widely acknowledged as the closing chapter in this mystery. However, as we noted in our introduction, amongst the absolutes proclaimed was one qualifier that has been conveniently and repeatedly overlooked. The authors stated Homo sapiens sapiens "probably" evolved in Africa, and now, with the benefit of hindsight, we can see that the qualification was a wise one.
Wilson and Cann proposed all modern humans shared the same ancient mother, who they named Eve. According to their calculations she lived in Africa sometime between 150,000 and 200,000 years ago. Of crucial importance are two of the three assumptions that underpin their mathematics. "The aboriginal [sic] populations of New Guinea and Australia are estimated to have been founded less than 50,000 to 60,000 years ago. The amount of evolution that has since occurred in each of those places seems about one third of that shown by the whole human species. Accordingly, we can infer that Eve lived three times 50,000 to 60,000 years ago, or roughly 150,000 to 180,000 years ago." This declaration was regarded as the final word, and the resolution of "15 years of disagreement" between two branches of science. Wilson and Cann triumphantly proclaimed victory on behalf of the molecular geneticists declaring that "we won the argument, when the palaeontologists admitted we had been right and they had been wrong."
With the case closed and bragging rights secured in perpetuity, science had once again provided certainty in regard to an African ancestry. Or so it seemed, but not long after their paper was published, Rebecca Cann realized they were mistaken.
Cann and Wilson's analysis focuses on the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) present in bone and blood samples. These genes are passed on from mother to daughter and are the most reliable evidence to draw on when determining the age of a particular race. MtDNA is far more reliable than the nearest male equivalent, the Y chromosome, and more predictable in its progression. Each new strand resulting from mutation appears at a set rate and the more variations apparent in a sample of DNA the older the race.
However, Cann and Wilson's paper was based on observing evolutionary markers they assumed were apparent which were not actually based on examination of the DNA itself. In 1982 Cann actually examined the mitochondrial DNA of 112 Indigenous people, including twelve full-descent Originals, and the results were in total opposition to what they assumed was fully resolved. Cann was obliged to contradict the basic conclusion of their first paper, by stating that "mitochondrial DNA puts the origin of Homo sapiens much further back and indicates that the Australian Aboriginals arose 400,000 years ago from two distinct lineages, far earlier than any other racial type." Cann not only asserted that the emergence of Original Homo sapiens was "far earlier" than any Africans, she suggested a new point of origin of the species and a revised chronology of racial evolution. "The Australian racial group has a much higher number of mutations than any other racial group, which suggests that the Australians split off from a common ancestor about 400,000 years ago. By the same theory, the Mongoloid race originated about 100,000 years ago, and the Negroid and Caucasian groups about 40,000 years ago."
The realignment and reversals were of immediate concern to Alan Wilson. If Cann was correct in detecting a "much higher number of mutations" they might as well tear up their original paper. Determined to resolve the obvious inconsistencies, Wilson made two visits to Australia. In 1987, Wilson sampled the mtDNA of twenty-one full-descent Australian Originals and identified fifteen different strands. This equates to a 70% mutation rate, well above that of any race.
A second visit in 1989 gave up even more data that forced Wilson to abandon his belief that Africa was where Homo sapiens originated. A second sampling of the DNA of ten full blood Originals found a similar percentage (70%) of mutation present. Upon receiving the results of his second mtDNA sampling, Wilson immediately conceded that the OAT was wrong.
The math wasn't complicated: the agreed rate of mtDNA mutation for every new strand is 3,500 years; therefore 22 × 3,500 = 77,000 years. Wilson realized if he returned to Australia and increased the population surveyed, the likelihood was that he would find more mutations and the date was likely to be pushed back even further.
"It seems too far out to admit, but while Homo erectus was muddling along in the rest of the world, a few erectus had got to Australia and did something dramatically different — not even with stone tools — but it is there that Homo sapiens have emerged and evolved ... Homo sapiens would have evolved free from competition out of a small band of Homo erectus 400,000 years ago."
Sadly, and somewhat puzzlingly, these findings were mostly ignored. In fact, opposition to OAT lost momentum. Perhaps this conservative climate goes some way towards explaining the reactions to Alan Thorne's research into the genetics and antiquity of Lake Mungo Man (WLH3). Re-dated to be over 60,000 years old and the oldest Homo sapiens yet found, this discovery in itself raises serious doubts about the validity of any theory claiming the first mariners reached the northern parts of Australia 60,000 years ago. This date, coupled with the discovery that WLH3 had an "extinct DNA" which does not resemble that of any other population, surely calls into question the reality of an African migration.
Referring back to Wilson and Cann's original calculations, their proposed timing of between 50,000 and 60,000 years ago for the settlement of Australia stands on no less shaky ground than their genetic miscalculation. There are at least nine Australian sites claimed to be older than 60,000 years (see the table below for a quick summary). Granted every date is challenged by conservative critics, but even so, all those proposed are the result of work by respected academics. What needs to be accepted is that if just one date proves to be correct, irrespective of whatever judgment is passed on the other nine, it can be confidently declared as a fact that Australia was not settled by African Homo sapiens 60,000 years ago.
THE FIRST AMERICANS
The recent discoveries of "hundreds of skeletal remains" in America that "look like Australian Aborigines" indicate that early immigrations were more likely from Australia than to it. In the October/November 2011 edition of Cosmos, Jacqui Hayes presented a compelling morphological case in support of there being an Australian Original presence in America. According to Hayes, Original settlement of the Americas began at an indeterminate time before the second migration of people "with distinctive Mongoloid features," and that "startling new finds suggest Australia's first people made it all the way to South America more than 11,000 years ago," This leaves an unresolved question. How far back did these Original settlements span, and were other locations settled? If, indeed, Hayes is right, in that Australian Original people were the first to enter America, any artifact or indication of human activity dated as more than 11,000 years old must be related to people bearing Australian Original genes.
The impossibility of any ancient African migration to America having occurred was confirmed through the examination of Original bones that established the presence of distinctive antigens. "ArnaizVilena and his team looked at the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) system, which is a group of proteins on the surface of human immune cells. The HLAs are what doctors test for to determine whether one person's tissues are compatible for organ or bone transplants. HLA is a nuclear marker giving an even genealogy and genetic history for both sexes. The best test showing that HLA is a good genetic marker for studying population relatedness in that it usually correlates with geography."
As expected, the first nominee was Australian, but just as importantly the comparative results bore witness to one genetic type which was notably missing; it seems the Africans forgot to sign on for this distinctive genetic marker. "So what did they find? Unique signatures only found in Australian Aborigines, Pacific Islanders, and peoples in Asia and even in Europe." The non-appearance of African HLA is yet another inconvenient piece of evidence for anyone wishing to hold onto the theory that Eve was an African.
When factoring in these recent additions to the Australian Original/American time line, dates just exceeding the maximum Clovis (Mongoloid) entry date are certainly inconvenient to established theory, but do not demand tearing out pages from standard text books ... yet. There is a substantial amount of corroborating evidence of Original presence in the Americas during the 10,000 years before the second migration from Asia began. It can be found at Tlapacoya, 21,700–25,000 years before present (BP), Los Toldos Cave, Patagonia, 14–15,000 BP, "Meadowbank Rockshelter 19,000 BP (southwest Pennsylvania), Tibito 14,400 BP (Colombia), Walker 15,000 BP (Minnesota), and Mud Lake 13,450 BP (Wisconsin)."
But it doesn't stop there. Professor Silvia Gonzalez, who is a leading advocate of the Out-of-Australia Theory (OAusT), was "quite staggered" by the dates obtained when analyzing the footprints found in a layer of volcanic ash at Lake Valsequillo (Mexico). "A variety of prints (human and animal) captured in this layer of rock were dated using optically stimulated luminescence (O.S.L.)." She found, much to her understandable surprise, that 40,000 years was established as the "last time that these sediments were lit by the sun's rays or the last time that the material was heated."Gonzalez is adamant these are Australian Original footprints, and that they were left by people who reached America by boat by "island hopping" around the Pacific Basin.
Such a date, 40,000 years, pushes the boundaries and affirms the reality of an extensive Original tenure in the Americas. Nor is this an isolated bit of evidence. The corroborative timing of Albert Goodyear's site cannot be a coincidence, and its significance is strengthened by the considerable distance between locations. "Goodyear had been working at an archaeological site on the Savannah river, near Topper. It was agreed all the available evidence from the Clovis site had been gathered and their work was complete ... He kept digging for another four metres before an assortment of stone tools, along with a hearth, were unearthed. A small piece of charcoal was then analyzed by counting the residual Carbon 14 and a date of no less than 37,000 years was deemed appropriate." Uncomfortable as these dates are for anyone clinging to traditional theories in relation to when ancient Australian Originals first came to America, for such individuals it gets worse. Not far from the Lake Valsequillo footprints Gonzalez investigated is another site that was deliberately ignored for close to thirty years after a comprehensive investigation was conducted by Cynthia Irwin-Williams. The dates are so sensational and numerous, and so obviously associated with objects made by Homo sapiens, the archaeologists downed their tools and clipboards and vowed never to return. The dates returned by a variety of sound geological analyses were far too ancient, not only for a presence in the Americas, but well outside the assumed period when Homo sapiens first appeared on earth! To some extent the issue isn't just a matter of whether these numbers are feasible, it is more a case of open antagonism between two competing branches of science.
Christopher Hardaker, author of The First American, created a fictional conversation between the two competing parties which graphically highlights how much the argument over which group of academics have the right to exclusively claim victory has blinded the combatants.
ARCHAEOLOGIST: You are asking us to believe that the sophisticated art and technology of the Upper Paleolithic was actually invented over 200,000 years ago in Central Mexico by Homo erectus? Ridiculous.
GEOLOGIST: You are asking us to believe that Science is off by a magnitude of 10? Ridiculous.
Often the result of cutting-edge technology, the chemical analysis and computations came from extremely reputable institutions and individuals. Some of the techniques performed upon the layer of volcanic ash and debris deposited above the artifacts and footprints which delivered the offending dates include Uranium Series Dating (200,000 years); Zircon Fission Track (170–640,000 years); mineral solutions (200,000 years); Diatom analysis (80,000 years); U-Th/He (200,000 years); tephrahydration (250,000 years); magnetic shifts in rocks (790,000 years); and argon argon (1,300,000 years). The facts, and large figures, demand a response. What if just one date is actually right? Does that mean Homo sapiens were, as Christopher Hardaker claims, responsible for "600,000 year old art?"
As to whether Gonzalez'"island hopping" route from Australia, up through Asia, Japan, Siberia, then America is plausible, it is often said a picture can act as a worthy substitute for quite a few words. A photograph of a Japanese full-descent Ainu Elder was taken in the late nineteenth century by German anthropologist, Dr. Hermann Klaatsch. The physical characteristics displayed in this photograph are strikingly similar to those of an Australian Aborigine. As are those of "a very well-preserved skeleton from Gua Gunung, Malaysia," which was recently discovered and about which it was reported "[this] specimen is aged 10,200 B.P. and is said to be a late representative of a non-specialized morphology, similar to Australian Aborigines."
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Out of Australia by Steven Strong, Evan Strong. Copyright © 2017 Steven and Evan Strong. Excerpted by permission of Hampton Roads Publishing Company, Inc..
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
