Cave deposits yield bones of sheep, yaks, carnivores, and birds that were butchered.
See full article...
See full article...
Or it indicates that someone or something disturbed the layers in the cave 30,000 years ago and jumbled the layers.Intriguingly, the bone came from a layer within the cave where environmental DNA hadn't indicated the Densivans were present. Whether this is a matter of the Denisovans having become less frequent visitors or a matter of the preservation of environmental DNA isn't clear. But it does indicate the Denisovans were present on the Tibetan Plateau as recently as 30,000 years ago.
… what they ate. And that appears to be anything they could get their hands on.
Oddly, it came to the attention of the paleontology community because the cave was a pilgrimage site for Tibetan monks,
You can usually see when the stratigraphy has been disturbed. You really can’t just jumble the layers and end up with them still looking like individual layers.Or it indicates that someone or something disturbed the layers in the cave 30,000 years ago and jumbled the layers.
I expect it would depend on how thick the layers are, vs how deeply it was found in the layers and a host of other things. But just finding DNA from a lower level on an upper level doesn't mean it was laid there naturally. Earthquakes in the region could have done the unsettling all by themselves.
Just a thought. Considering how few Denisovian remains have been identified, you'd think there'd be a lot more in places where they lived. And if they survived for hundreds of thousands (or millions) of years to be dying out at the same time Neanderthal did, you'd think we'd have found a lot more of those remains.
If they practiced Sky Burials, then there might not be much left and we're lucky to have found anything.Or it indicates that someone or something disturbed the layers in the cave 30,000 years ago and jumbled the layers.
I expect it would depend on how thick the layers are, vs how deeply it was found in the layers and a host of other things. But just finding DNA from a lower level on an upper level doesn't mean it was laid there naturally. Earthquakes in the region could have done the unsettling all by themselves.
Just a thought. Considering how few Denisovian remains have been identified, you'd think there'd be a lot more in places where they lived. And if they survived for hundreds of thousands (or millions) of years to be dying out at the same time Neanderthal did, you'd think we'd have found a lot more of those remains.
Maybe it means they were reincarnated from Denisovans.Does that mean Tibetan monks descended from Denisovans?
.
.
.
Tough crowd!
That was my thought. An early attempt at animal husbandry."with an increasing number of sheep in the more recent layers, suggesting that the Denisovans there were becoming more specialized hunters."
A good way to ensure there are plenty of herd animals, is to protect the herd from predators. That is the path to domestication.
Critters like wolves and other mega fauna tend to lead to a desire for protection among human groups when you're trying to stay alive in a wilderness.Were the Denisovans a happy and outgoing people, or were they all dour and buttoned up? I don't like this remote cave thing.
Satire is lost on most people. I thought it was cleverMaybe it means they were reincarnated from Denisovans.
Well, the cave closer to the mall wasn't open yet.Were the Denisovans a happy and outgoing people, or were they all dour and buttoned up? I don't like this remote cave thing.
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. You’re right. While pedantic in a social circle, when replying to a scientific article where the difference is important, I think it’s fine to point out (and let others learn from).Elevation, not altitude. Sorry, pet peeve!
Given the increasing evidence for the Denisovans being seriously tough mofo's that were very hard to kill, I'd link them more with Sherpas.Does that mean Tibetan monks descended from Denisovans?
.
.
.
Tough crowd!
Given the increasing evidence for the Denisovans being seriously tough mofo's that were very hard to kill, I'd link them more with Sherpas.
Should we start calling them Sherpovans?
This is not a geography paper, so we can use the word everyone but geographers use.Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. You’re right. While pedantic in a social circle, when replying to a scientific article where the difference is important, I think it’s fine to point out (and let others learn from).
Maybe the downvoters don’t like learning?
Does everyone though? It would never occur to me to use a phrase like, the “altitude above sea level” when talking about land. I also don’t recall seeing the altitude listed on city limits signs in Colorado. Elevation on the other hand . . .This is not a geography paper, so we can use the word everyone but geographers use.
Well no, you’d just say altitude. Above sea level is understood.Does everyone though? It would never occur to me to use a phrase like, the “altitude above sea level” when talking about land. I also don’t recall seeing the altitude listed on city limits signs in Colorado. Elevation on the other hand . . .
I'm not sure either. Although, we live in interesting times.Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. You’re right. While pedantic in a social circle, when replying to a scientific article where the difference is important, I think it’s fine to point out (and let others learn from).
Maybe the downvoters don’t like learning?
Could his last name be Simmons? Descendant of the late Thag Simmons who was so wonderfully profiled in The Far Side?I love that Denisovians are so named because of a guy named Denis
That’s great, you can use two different words for exactly the same concept depending on whether the subject is a geographical feature or not. Knock yourself out.
Image Source: GeographyRealm.com
Elevation is the measurement of the height of a geographical feature that is above mean sea level. Peak, cave, tree line..
Altitude is the vertical measurement of the distance of an object above the surface of the Earth. Bird, airplane, the ISS...
Heck, why do we also use two different words for exactly the same concept depending on whether we're describing an object or an act? He is a good kid and he did well. Could have said he is a well kid and he did good - and you would still understand my praises for the kid! We can go on and on about the 'convolution' aka English grammar. Nevertheless, people generally expect proper grammar and vocabulary, especially in articles/publications - versus casual verbal exchanges.That’s great, you can use two different words for exactly the same concept depending on whether the subject is a geographical feature or not. Knock yourself out.
Why this matters is completely beyond me. Why you think the geographical definition is the only possible one, equally beyond me.
It is bit weird when they are using the same reference level of mean sea level. Having two different names that end up with the same results as they use the same reference level seems more of a parallel usage and should be interchangeable if they are getting the exact same results. It's a bit like how fish have different local names, but they are still the same fish in either location. I understand that the technical answer, is technically the best answer, but not when they are the same answer.That’s great, you can use two different words for exactly the same concept depending on whether the subject is a geographical feature or not. Knock yourself out.
Why this matters is completely beyond me. Why you think the geographical definition is the only possible one, equally beyond me.
I don't know why people keep elevating the altitude argument. Denisovans didn't use either word.It is bit weird when they are using the same reference level of mean sea level. Having two different names that end up with the same results as they use the same reference level seems more of a parallel usage and should be interchangeable if they are getting the exact same results. It's a bit like how fish have different local names, but they are still the same fish in either location. I understand that the technical answer, is technically the best answer, but not when they are the same answer.
'Elevation is a term used in geography and cartography to describe the height of a specific point on Earth’s surface in relation to a reference point, usually mean sea level. Elevation is commonly expressed in meters (m) or feet (ft) and is an essential element in understanding the topography and landscape of a region.
Mean sea level is the average height of the ocean’s surface, as measured by the midpoint between high and low tides. By comparing the height of a point on land to the mean sea level, we can determine its elevation.
...
Altitude is a term used in geography, aviation, and space sciences to describe the vertical distance or height of an object or point above a specific reference level. While the terms elevation and altitude are sometimes used interchangeably, they have distinct meanings in certain contexts.
In the context of geography, altitude refers to the height of a point or object above a reference level, usually the Earth’s surface or mean sea level. It is commonly expressed in meters (m) or feet (ft). Altitude data helps in understanding the topography, climate, and ecology of a region.'
https://mapscaping.com/what-is-the-difference-between-elevation-relief-and-altitude/
That's probably very likely on the Tibetan plateau. No where to really bury a body, not much wood to waste on cremation.If they practiced Sky Burials, then there might not be much left and we're lucky to have found anything.
There may be a lot more. See Homo longi. The difficulty is that we have a lack of DNA to go along with most of the fossils we've found, and where we do have DNA, it's not from a bone that can be definitively matched with the existing fossils.Or it indicates that someone or something disturbed the layers in the cave 30,000 years ago and jumbled the layers.
I expect it would depend on how thick the layers are, vs how deeply it was found in the layers and a host of other things. But just finding DNA from a lower level on an upper level doesn't mean it was laid there naturally. Earthquakes in the region could have done the unsettling all by themselves.
Just a thought. Considering how few Denisovian remains have been identified, you'd think there'd be a lot more in places where they lived. And if they survived for hundreds of thousands (or millions) of years to be dying out at the same time Neanderthal did, you'd think we'd have found a lot more of those remains.
HACE ‑ High Altitude Cerebral OedemaDoes everyone though? It would never occur to me to use a phrase like, the “altitude above sea level” when talking about land. I also don’t recall seeing the altitude listed on city limits signs in Colorado. Elevation on the other hand . . .
...
Elevation is the measurement of the height of a geographical feature that is above mean sea level. Peak, cave, tree line..
Altitude is the vertical measurement of the distance of an object above the surface of the Earth. Bird, airplane, the ISS...