… Man searching for toilet in Australia’s outback makes astounding discovery of 49,000-year-old human settlement  … Archaeologists working with traditional Aboriginal owners have discovered astounding evidence of the earliest human habitation of inland Australia. – Sutff, NewZealand’s Largest Online Source

Australian habitation keeps getting pushed back and this discovery mentioned above pushes it back farther.

But apparently not far enough. There are alternative explanations that claim Aborigines are somewhere in the area of 300,000 years old.

This theory claims that Aborigine people colonized the world including Africa.

The theory is supposedly based on inaccurate African DNA samples and more accurate Australian DNA samples

You can see a comprehensive article here. There are a number of fascinating YouTube videos on the subject as well (if YouTub hasn’t taken them down).

The article refers to a paper, Recent African Genesis of Humans, by Professors Alan Wilson and Rebecca Cann. This paper was said to have established that humans came out of Africa. It was the “final word,” but then came this:

Not long after their paper was published Rebecca Cann realised they were mistaken. In 1982 she examined the mitochondrial DNA of 112 Indigenous people, including twelve full-descent Aboriginals, and the results were in total opposition to what they assumed was fully resolved.

Nevertheless, Cann was obliged to contradict a central tenet of their paper, 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.”

Not only was the emergence of Aboriginal Homo sapiens “far earlier” than any Africans, she provided a sequence and motherland.

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 originated about 100,000 years ago, and the Negroid and Caucasian groups about 40,000 years ago.

Alan Wilson was “desperate” to reclaim validity for the paper’s initial conclusions and visited Australia twice. He sampled “mtDNA of 21 full-descent Australian Aboriginals and provided 15 different strands.” The results led Wilson to decide that there must have been “15 pregnant females on board.”

He tried again in in 1989 but was no more successful. The second sampling included a “similar percentage (70%) of mutation was present.” Wilson quit at this point, conceding that humans had not come out of Africa initially.

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.

There are at least ten Australian sites claimed to be older than 60,000 years, granted every date is challenged by conservative critics, but even so, all are the products of 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 Aborigine culture is based on so-called Dreamtime narratives that provide a history of Aborigine society. In fact, Egyptian inscriptions have been found in Australian caves. It is perfectly possible that Egyptian culture was in some sense initiated in Australia.

The idea is that human culture generally is Australian. Illustrations of big, high-prowed boats have been found on rock walls in Australia.  These are sea-going vessels.

It is fairly clear that Aborigines reached South America perhaps 40,000 years ago and were subsequently attacked by waves of immigrant Indians. The Aborigines retreated to the bottom of South America, and islands there, where their descendants remain.

Fascinating technology exists in Australia. Most significant are hand-sized “melted rocks” that also serve as star-maps. Even today we don’t have the technology to melt successive layers of rock, one on-top of the other.

And these melted rock maps have further elaborations.  They seem to provide maps of the astrological heavens, hundreds or thousands of different constellations.

The aborigine culture yields up numerous secrets. The tribes owned their land for tens of thousands of years and thus we can see that ownership of land is an organizing factor of mankind. They had confrontations but these were often individual in nature. The aborigine culture existed in Australia without major, ongoing wars, apparently.

This is a larger lesson that indicates quite clearly that our current hyper-militarization is a kind of farcical propaganda. Human beings don’t have to live in a perpetual state of war.

The information about the Aborigine past is useful in other ways as well. It shows us more clearly than ever that there are two kinds of cultures in the world.

There is tribal culture that  organizes itself in harmony with “nature” and is both inclusive and democratic. Then there is “urban” culture that seeks to put people into huge metropolises where every facet of person’s life can be controlled.

Currently urban culture is ascendant. And the more one contemplates it, the more it seems purposeful rather than coincidental.

Everywhere,  tribal culture is under attack. In the Americas, tribal culture has been considerably diminished. Pacific cultures have lost tribal elements and these are only being gradually rediscovered.

It turns out that there was a pan-Pacific culture that included canoe travel without maps. The navigator steered using perceptions of the waves and the sky.

Often the navigator would supposedly go into a trance and stay in a semi-wakeful state for weeks at time. There was a whole culture associated with this sort of navigation and a pervasive education that could take decades to master.

It had nothing to do with “drifting rafts” visiting other islands coincidentally.

The aborigine culture has been virtually wiped out in Australia like other tribal cultures. But the more we understand about these cultures, the better. Unfortunately, there are considerable, organized barriers in the way.

For instance, it is surely likely that organized human habitation took place more than 5,000 years ago. It is possible that coastal cities exited 10,000 years ago or longer. These cities were wiped out in a huge flood, or so the hypothesis goes.

But there are evidences of this ancient culture including a city more than a mile offshore beyond India’s Western coast. The Indian government indicated it would investigate a decade ago but has not yet.

The current archaeological bias involves a narrative of human civilization that begins with Sumer and ascends from there. But it is perfectly possible that the story of humanity is a good deal more complicated and includes ebbs and flows.

The current archaeological bias militates against tribalism. We are supposed to believe that human society has ascended in perpetual progress. That makes anything that comes now better than what came before, which benefits elite strategies for continually organizing and manipulating humankind.

Conclusion: It’s perfectly possible that human history is a good deal  different than what we’ve been told. One place to begin a reexamination is Australia.