Mexico cave stone tools hint Americans arrived much earlier, say 30,000 years ago

A massive haul of stone tools discovered in a cave in Mexico provide evidence that people occupied the area more than 30,000 years ago, suggesting that humans arrived in North America at least 15,000 years earlier than had been previously thought. The discovery is backed up by a separate statistical analysis incorporating data from sites in North America and Siberia.

But some researchers are not convinced. They question the age of the tools, and whether the artefacts are tools or rather created by natural processes. Data from caves are “notoriously troublesome” to interpret, says archaeologist François Lanoë from the University of Arizona in Tucson.

First Humans in America

The first humans in the Americas came from East Asia, but when the date of their arrival remains still debatable. Some researchers suggest that it could have been as early as 130,000 years ago, but lacking the archaeological evidence, this theory is disputed. Many stone artefacts are so simple that sceptics say they were probably produced by natural geological processes and not by humans.

The mainstream consensus is that the people ff the Americas began about 15,000 or 16,000 years ago — based on genetic evidence and artefacts found at sites including the 14,000-year-old Monte Verde II in Chile.  The latest discoveries, published on 22 July in Nature, question that consensus.

New evidence from Chiquihuite Cave in Mexico joins other sites across the Americas where scientists have found signs of early human occupation (kyr, a thousand years ago).

New evidence from Chiquihuite Cave in Mexico joins other sites across the Americas where scientists have found signs of early human occupation (kyr, a thousand years ago) / Nature

Since 2012, a team led by Ciprian Ardelean at the Autonomous University of Zacatecas in Mexico has been excavating Chiquihuite Cave in Astillero Mountains. The researchers found 2,000 stone tools, 239 of which were embedded in layers of gravel that have been carbon dated to between 25,000 and 32,000 years old.

Caves Occasional Camps

There are some tools that Ardelean thinks suggest the site could have been visited only occasionally, perhaps as a refuge every few decades, during severe winters. At the height of the last ice age, 26,000 years ago, North America would have been a dangerous place. “There must have been horrible storms, hail, snow,” he says. He adds that the Chiquihuite Cave is well insulated and could have provided shelter to any humans who were around to witness the blizzards.

Other controversial studies claim that humans reached Americas 100,000 years earlier than thought but the analysis was disputed pointing out that it purposely omitted information from the most controversial sites, to make its case stronger. If there were people in North America so early, it’s unclear what happened to them.

“There continues to be no convincing genetic evidence of a pre-15,000-years-ago human presence in the Americas,” says geneticist David Reich at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts

However, Ardelean says there is a simple reason why genetic studies suggest that humans spread across the Americas only relatively recently, and early groups such as the one he thinks was present at Chiquihuite Cave didn’t survive to contribute to modern gene pools. “I definitely advocate for the idea of lost groups,” he says.

Should I stay or should I leave?

Knowing whether to stay in or leave a romantic relationship is often an agonizing experience and that ambivalence can have negative consequences for health and well-being.

Now a new study offers insights into what people are deliberating about and what makes the decision so difficult, which could help therapists working with couples and stimulate further research into the decision-making process.

The study, led by U psychology professor Samantha Joel, was published in Social Psychology and Personality Science. Co-authors were Geoff MacDonald and Elizabeth Page-Gould of the University of Toronto.

“Most of the research on breakups has been predictive, trying to predict whether a couple stays together or not, but we don’t know much about the decision process — what are the specific relationship pros and cons that people are weighing out,” Joel said.

In the first phase of the study, the researchers recruited three samples of people — including people who were in the midst of trying to decide whether to break up or not — to participate in an anonymous survey.

Participants were asked open-ended questions about their specific reasons for both wanting to stay and leave a relationship.

That yielded a list of 27 different reasons for wanting to stay in a relationship and 23 reasons for wanting to leave.

The stay/leave factors were then converted into a questionnaire that was given to another group of people who were trying to decide whether to end a dating relationship or marriage. Those dating had been together for two years on average, while married participants reported relationships that averaged nine years.

In both studies, general factors considered as the individuals deliberated what to do were similar.

At the top of the stay list: emotional intimacy, investment and a sense of obligation. At the top of the leave list: issues with a partner’s personality, breach of trust and partner withdrawal.

Individuals in both dating and married situations gave similar reasons for wanting to leave a relationship.

But the researchers found significant differences in stay reasoning between the two groups.

Participants who were in a dating relationship said they were considering staying based on more positive reasons such as aspects of their partner’s personality that they like, emotional intimacy and enjoyment of the relationship. Those who were married gave more constraint reasons for staying such as investment into the relationship, family responsibilities, fear of uncertainty and logistical barriers.

And about half of the participants said they had reasons to both stay and leave, indicating ambivalence about their relationships.

“What was most interesting to me was how ambivalent people felt about their relationships. They felt really torn,” Joel said. “Breaking up can be a really difficult decision. You can look at a relationship from outside and say ‘you have some really unsolvable problems, you should break up’ but from the inside that is a really difficult thing to do and the longer you’ve been in a relationship, the harder it seems to be.”

Most people, Joel said, have standards and deal breakers about the kind of person they want to date or marry but those often go out the window when they meet someone.

“Humans fall in love for a reason,” Joel said. “From an evolutionary perspective, for our ancestors finding a partner may have been more important than finding the right partner. It might be easier to get into relationships than to get back out of them.”