Main Discussion Area > Flintknapping

Zuma, I got a massive overshot video for you.

<< < (5/7) > >>

Zuma:
The bottom line here Ben is that many have deceived others and perpetuated a
sad myth about the ancient phenomena  of OVERSHOT. :'( :'(
While you and others attempt to exploit the Clovis name there are folks like me around
doing the real fact checking.  O:)
The major fact in my opinion and the opinion of many that you assume are your
 detractors is OVERSHOT is nothing more than a natural part of lithic reduction.  ??? ???
That part being recorded in flake count and interpretation by folks that shut down the
 Clovis/ Solutrean connection by exposing it's fallacies. :-K :-K
Not to mention there stead fast opinions that OVERSHOT is nothing more than a
normal MISTAKE through out knapping history. Not a method of dire importance.
Thank you for admitting to the fact that you contrived the Clovis connection with your
work to attract attention to yourself. I hope you soon make a similar admission on
your facebook page and other writings. Cushing's work just does not make a convincing
stretch back to ancient knapping practices. That story is yet untold.
Zuma

AncientTech:
You are mistaken.  The technology can be used to create many different kinds of flaking.  But, I know that knappers will look into it more quickly if they see the overshot aspect. 

Hyperbole - Modern knappers say they make "Clovis" points, right?  So, I am saying that we are making "Clovis" flaking.  Are we the Clovis people?  Obviously not.  So, we are not saying anything different than what modern knappers say everday.  And, it is actually a nice form of hyperbole.  Everytime an overshot is made, we can call it "Clovis", just as they call copper percussion points Clovis.

Fact Checking - You can do all the fact checking you want.  But, people who spent years in archaeological field work have stated up front that the tools being used are the closest thing to the real McCoy ever seen, when modified deer tines are used.  I heard this from three people with archaeological backgrounds in a week.  I also heard it from collectors.

Solutrean - I do not believe in a Soutrean-Clovis connection.  I have never said that A came from B, as others have done.  You are talking to the wrong person.  I also study genetics, as a hobby.  I am well acquainted with New World haplotypes, and do not think that "boating from Europe" is a viable explanation.

Also, I do not need "attention".  I already experienced my successes in life.  I do not need the approval from anyone, so long as I know that I am sticking to facts.  Actually, I do not even like interacting with flintknappers, after all the grief that was dished out in 2010, 2011, 2012, and on.  But, it looks like competent people are taking this seriously.  And, they always tell me, "Who gives a s--t about flintknappers?!"  And, my answer is that the world needs them because they have the best shot - but not when it is based on ignorance, and stubborn denial of evidence.  Now, I have ten trained guys.

Whatever you say about Cushing is a matter or presumption.  I did my homework.  And, others did not.

Have a great day!! :)

 

Zuma:
Oh well :-\
Have a Happy New Year!

aaron:
this thread is going downhill fast- too much arguing and anger. Besides the unanswered questions above, one more:
What is it about "cushng overshots" that is differet from regular baton overshots/ coast-to-coast.THey look the same to me. I do them with a baton all the time.see below- billet flake in Danish flint. obsidian preform- about 8:1 width to thickness ratio, shown with a drawing of a Fenn Cache preform.

AncientTech:

--- Quote from: aaron on December 31, 2017, 10:20:57 am ---this thread is going downhill fast- too much arguing and anger. Besides the unanswered questions above, one more:
What is it about "cushng overshots" that is differet from regular baton overshots/ coast-to-coast.THey look the same to me. I do them with a baton all the time.see below- billet flake in Danish flint. obsidian preform- about 8:1 width to thickness ratio, shown with a drawing of a Fenn Cache preform.

--- End quote ---

It is not about visuals.  Visuals can be like smoke and mirrors.  Finished points can lie.  Last stages can hide what was shown in previous stages. 

In terms of authentic processes, what I am showing is an authentic process that has been on the books since the late 19th century.  And, it covers all forms of flaking, not just overshot.  The antler baton method was invented in England around 1940.  The first experiments ever carried out were documented by Knowles in a paper called "Stoneworker's Progress".  Cushing did not invent a new flintknapping method in a laboratory.  He was an anthropologist and made an exact record of processes used by Native Americans, in the western US.  So, in terms of authenticity, there is a big difference.  And, that is what people in Europe, and people in South America, and people in China, and people outside of the US knapping circles instantly recognize.  By the way, I am going to have to assume that moose antler billets are not going to fit inside half inch wide recessed platforms. 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page