Artifact at 38,000 years old defies North American Archaeology's "Near Clovis First"

I am reporting Mr. Stanon's findings as a significant clue for archaeologists about how far off their dates are for the earliest people in America. The mainstream insists about 15,000 years ago, this find adds 23,000 years to that. It confirms the observations of many that North American Archaeology is still stuck in a "Clovis first or damn close" dogma and cannot conceive of the possibility of significantly contradictory evidence. 

The art, and tools associated with it, as seen on this blog suggests Lower and Middle Paleolithic lithic cultural traditions can be found here.

This one amateur find should not change the course of Archaeology but should give confidence and inspiration to those scientists who wish to do so.

The field of Archaeology is looking for the wrong things in the wrong places and is not able to detect the earliest American inhabitants the way more science-minded people can. -Ken Johnston

Artifact at 38,000 years old defies North American Archaeology's "Near Clovis First" dogma

In 2012 Ken Stanton, an amateur geo-archaeologist, identified suspected stone tools exposed in a suspected Pleistocene cemented breccia or debris flow at Phoenix, Arizona.

To back up his own observation Ken has had a favorable opinion from an archaeologist with “Old World” experience regarding the artefactual nature of his sample:

“Description: A6553 is a biface (a chopping tool or cleaver) or flake core of white vein quartz. The artifact is 13.23 cm in maximum length and 10.96 cm in maximum width.  The maximum thickness at the proximal end (“butt”) is 10.45 cm.  The artifact has two flat faces, a squarish butt, and two lateral edges.  From the squarish butt the piece thins to a straight, transverse distal end.  One lateral edge is straight, and the other is sinuous. The overall shape of the artifact is that of a wedge.

Upon initial examination, most of the surface of the artifact was observed to be covered with a thick deposit of calcium carbonate (CaCO3).  After dating assays were completed, this carbonate deposit was partially removed with HCl and a dental tool.  One face was uncovered completely along with three quarters of the other face.  Most of one lateral edge was uncovered, and about half of the other edge.  The butt remains covered in carbonate.

Upon subsequent examination, both faces and the exposed portions of the lateral edges were observed to have been shaped by hard-hammer percussion.  Invasive flake removals (3-5 cm in length) were used to flatten the faces and shape the straight, transverse distal end of the piece.  Abrupt flake removals (scars are 2-3 cm in length) were used to shape the lateral edges.  The flake removals originate from the edges of the tool, as is evident from the remaining negative bulbs of percussion, which are aligned along the margins of the tool.  There are multiple sub-parallel removals, more than five for each face and lateral edge.

The carbonate crust covers the flake scars.  Some fresh chips are visible on the distal end of the tool, which was not covered by the carbonate.  They appear to be fresh breaks and may have been created near to, or at the time the specimen was collected.  The exposed quartz visible in these small chips is a bright white color.  It readily reflects light.

The flake removals on the faces and lateral edges, by contrast, are dull in appearance, or at least less light-reflective, and appear to have been altered by exposure to the elements when on the surface or by contact with the surrounding matrix after burial (“patinated”).  The flake removals on the faces and lateral edges may have been created as the result of one knapping event, as they appear to have become uniformly patinated to the depth of a few millimeters (to judge by the patina exposed by the fresh breaks on the distal end) before the carbonate was deposited over them.

Curtis Runnels, MA, PhD, Professor of Archaeology Department Boston University
675 Commonwealth Avenue
Boston MA 02215”

Additionally, Ken was able to determine his sample artifact was a candidate for uranium series dating because of a carbonate accumulation on the worked surfaces of the tool. After testing in 2014, dating of the carbonate places a minimum date on the tool because it may have existed for many years before the carbonate began to accumulate. This artifact may be considered "directly dated," meaning the artifact itself was dated rather than something in the context of the artifact being dated.

“Hi Ken, I have just calculated dates for 2 small samples taken from the carbonate- coating on the worked face of sample A6553. The samples yield U-series dates of about 38 and 40 ka! The carbonate is somewhat impure, and the dates required corrections of 6-8 ka due to the impurities. Nonetheless, I think the dates are accurate within a few thousand years.
Best, Warren
Warren Sharp
Berkeley Geochronology Center
2455 Ridge Rd.
Berkeley, CA 94709”

Ken Stanton’s discovery of a directly dated 38,000 year old stone tool in America has been ignored by mainstream archaeology and Ken continues his efforts to call attention to the important implications of his find.

Context of the Ken Stanton finds in the desert at Phoenix, Arizona

Ken Stanton with a profile view of the cemented flow

One side of the dated bi-facially worked artifact

Source of the calcium carbonate accumulation which was laboratory dated