New research strengthens case for age of ancient New Mexico footprints
By Will Dunham
(Reuters) -A new line of evidence is providing further corroboration of the antiquity of fossilized footprints discovered at White Sands National Park in New Mexico that rewrite the history of humans in the Americas.
Researchers used a technique called radiocarbon dating to determine that organic matter in the remains of wetland muds and shallow lake sediments near the fossilized foot impressions is between 20,700 and 22,400 years old. That closely correlates to previous findings, based on the age of pollen and seeds at the site, that the tracks are between 21,000 and 23,000 years old.
The footprints, whose discovery was announced in 2021, indicate that humans trod the landscape of North America thousands of years earlier than previously thought, during the most inhospitable conditions of the last Ice Age, a time called the last glacial maximum.
The age of the footprints has been a contentious issue.
Asked how the new findings align with the previous ones, University of Arizona archaeologist and geologist Vance Holliday, the study leader, replied: "Spectacularly well."
Homo sapiens arose in Africa roughly 300,000 years ago and later spread worldwide. Scientists believe our species entered North America from Asia by trekking across a land bridge that once connected Siberia to Alaska. Previous archaeological evidence had suggested that human occupation of North America started roughly 16,000 years ago.
The hunter-gatherers who left the tracks were traversing the floodplain of a river that flowed into an ancient body of water called Lake Otero. The mud through which they walked included bits of semi-aquatic plants that had grown in these wetlands.
Radiocarbon dating is used to determine the age of organic material based on the decay of an isotope called carbon-14, a variant of the element carbon. Living organisms absorb carbon-14 into their tissue. After an organism dies, this isotope changes into other atoms over time, providing a metric for determining age.
"Three separate carbon sources - pollen, seeds and organic muds and sediments - have now been dated by different radiocarbon labs over the course of the trackway research, and they all indicate a last glacial maximum age for the footprints," said Jason Windingstad, a University of Arizona doctoral candidate in environmental science and co-author of the study published this week in the journal Science Advances.
The original 2021 study dated the footprints using radiocarbon dating on seeds of an aquatic plant called spiral ditchgrass found alongside the tracks. A study published in 2023 used radiocarbon dating on conifer pollen grains from the same sediment layers as the ditchgrass seeds.
But some scientists had viewed the seeds and pollen as unreliable markers for dating the tracks. The new study provides further corroboration of the dating while also giving a better understanding of the local landscape at the time.
"When the original paper appeared, at the time we didn't know enough about the ancient landscape because it was either buried under the White Sands dune field or was destroyed when ancient Lake Otero, which had a lot of gypsum, dried out after the last Ice Age and was eroded by the wind to create the dunes," Holliday said.
Today, the landscape situated just west of the city of Alamogordo consists of rolling beige-colored dunes of the mineral gypsum.
"The area of and around the tracks included water that came off the mountains to the east, the edge of the old lake and wetlands along the margins of the lake. Our dating shows that this environment persisted before, during and after the time that people left their tracks," Holliday said.
The area could have provided important resources for hunter-gatherers.
"We know from the abundant tracks in the area that at least mammoths, giant ground sloths, camels and dire wolves were around, and likely other large animals. Given the setting, there must have been a large variety of other animals and also plants," Holliday added.
The climate was markedly different than today, with cooler summers and the area receiving significantly more precipitation.
"It is important to note that this is a trackway site, not a habitation site," Windingstad said. "It provides us a narrow view of people traveling across the landscape. Where they were going and where they came from is obviously an open question and one that requires the discovery and excavation of sites that are of similar age in the region. So far, these have not been found."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
SpaceX Starship upper stage explodes during countdown to engine test firing
The dramatic explosion of a SpaceX Starship upper stage rocket during a test at the company's Starbase facility on the Texas Gulf coast late Wednesday may have been triggered by the rupture of a high-pressure nitrogen tank, SpaceX founder Elon Musk said Thursday. The sudden explosion, fueled by ignition of methane propellant, created a huge fireball, billowing clouds of smoke and brilliant arcs of flaming debris shooting out like burning chunks of lava in a volcanic eruption. This image from video shows a SpaceX Starship upper stage exploding at the Starbase facility on the Texas Gulf Coast late Wednesday, June 18, 2025. TheRocketFuture via X / Reuters The blast was reminiscent of the sudden explosion of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket during fueling at Cape Canaveral in August 2016 that destroyed an Israeli communications satellite. The Falcon 9 failure was blamed on the rupture of a high-pressure helium tank, known as a carbon overwrap pressure vessel, or COPV. But the company said there is "no commonality" between the Falcon COPVs and those used in the Starship. "Preliminary data suggests that a nitrogen COPV in the payload bay failed below its proof pressure," Musk said of the latest mishap on his social media platform X. "If further investigation confirms that this is what happened, it is the first time ever for this design." The Starship upper stage exploded during the final stages of a countdown expected to end with a test firing of the rocket's six methane-powered Raptor engines on a test stand at the Starbase manufacturing facility. A single-engine test firing was carried out earlier this week. Such "hotfire" tests are a normal precursor to actual flights, allowing engineers to verify upgrades and overall performance prior to committing the rocket to launch. A successful test Wednesday would have helped pave the way to launch atop a Super Heavy booster around the end of the month for the program's 10th "integrated flight test." But the test did not go well. Video from LabPadre, a company that monitors SpaceX activities at Starbase, showed the Starship suddenly exploding in a huge fireball just after 11 p.m. CDT, 10 to 15 minutes before the anticipated engine test firing. The video showed what appeared to be two major explosions, the first detonation near the nose of the rocket followed a moment later by a second eruption of flame and debris on the left side of the spacecraft. The test stand disappeared in a billowing orange fireball that rose into the overnight sky like a bomb blast. Flames rise as a SpaceX rocket explodes ahead of an engine test at the company's Starbase facility in Texas, June 18, 2025, in this screengrab obtained from a social media video. TheRocketFuture via X / Reuters The Starship was being filled with a full load of liquid oxygen and a partial load of high-energy methane fuel when the detonations occurred. Ninety minutes after the initial blast, fires were still burning at the test site, where cryogenic testing and hotfires are typically conducted. "On Wednesday, June 18 at approximately 11 p.m. CT, the Starship preparing for the tenth flight test experienced a major anomaly while on a test stand at Starbase," SpaceX said in a statement on X. "A safety clear area around the site was maintained throughout the operation and all personnel are safe and accounted for. Our Starbase team is actively working to safe the test site and the immediate surrounding area in conjunction with local officials. "There are no hazards to residents in surrounding communities, and we ask that individuals do not attempt to approach the area." What impact the explosion might have had on the infrastructure at the test sight was not immediately known. NASA counting on Starship for moon mission SpaceX has launched nine Super Heavy-Starship test flights since April 2023. The first three flights ended with explosions or breakups that destroyed both stages. The fourth, fifth and sixth test flights were mostly successful, but two of the three most recent flights ended with Starship explosions before the spacecraft could reach its planned sub-orbital trajectory. During the third, most recent flight on May 27, the Starship reached its planned trajectory, but then spun out of control and broke up when it fell back into the atmosphere. NASA is counting on the giant rocket to launch a Starship variant to the moon that will carry astronauts to a landing near the lunar south pole in the next two or three years. It will not be easy. To get the Human Landing System — HLS — Starship variant to the moon, SpaceX will need to launch multiple Super Heavy-Starships to Earth orbit in rapid-fire fashion where they will have to autonomously dock, transfer excess propellants to a "depot" Starship, undock, and return to Earth. The HLS then would rendezvous and dock with the depot, reload its tanks and head for the moon to await the arrival of the Artemis astronauts aboard a Lockheed Martin-built Orion crew capsule. SpaceX has not said how many refueling flights might be necessary. But given that both the lander and tanker Starships will use up most of their propellant just getting into orbit, some independent observers estimate as many as 10 to 20 launches will be needed to gas up the lander for the flight to the moon. NASA officials have said the number likely will be in the "high teens." It's not known what might happen if one of those refueling flights suffers a catastrophic failure, but it's difficult to imagine launches would continue without first finding out what went wrong and fixing it. Along with mastering autonomous transfer of thousands of gallons of super-cold liquid oxygen and hydrogen while in space — a task never attempted at this scale — SpaceX will need to develop a reliable system to keep those propellants cold enough in the glare of the sun to minimize the amount that will boil off and be vented out to space. No such technology has yet been tested in the space environment. The need to launch multiple Super Heavy-Starships, the requirement to perfect the autonomous transfer of cryogenic propellants in space and new technology to keep the liquid methane and oxygen from warming and wasting away add up to a complex mission architecture with little margin for error under the current schedule. The latest mishap renews concern in some quarters about SpaceX's ability to get all of that done in just two to three years. But SpaceX has proven skeptics wrong before and NASA continues to express support for the company and the path forward to the Artemis 3 lumar landing mission. "Testing is a critical part of a development program, and we have confidence SpaceX will investigate every aspect of what went wrong to fix the issue," the agency said in a statement. While pointing out that the moon lander planned for its Artemis program is different from the developmental Starship currently being tested, the agency added that "NASA fully supports SpaceX as the company prepares Starship for future missions." "We look forward to the company delivering their Starship Human Landing System for NASA's Artemis 3 mission."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
NASA raises chance for asteroid to hit the moon
June 19 (UPI) -- NASA has announced that an asteroid about 200 feet in diameter is now slightly more likely to crash into the moon. According to the newest data collected, NASA's Center for Near-Earth Object Studies at the agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has refined the expected course for Asteroid 2024 YR4 and has given it an increased 4.3% probability of striking the moon on Dec. 22, 2032. The original likelihood was at 3.8% probability. The space rock is too far off in space to be detected with ground telescopes, but the James Webb Space Telescope, which orbits the sun, was able to take a new look at the space rock earlier this month before it was obscured from view. It was that opportunity that provided the data that led to the changed forecast. Due to YR4's solar orbit, NASA won't be able to view it again until it comes back around the sun in 2028. According to a research paper submitted to the American Astronomical Society journals and published Monday, should the asteroid hit the moon, it could cause a crater as large as around 3,200 feet and release 6.5 megatons of energy. As much as 220 million pounds of lunar material could be released by such an impact, and then as much as 10% of that ejecta could fall to Earth a few days later, so "meteorites are unlikely, though not impossible" according to the paper, but it would create an "eye-catching" meteor shower. However, any moon bits that do come toward the Earth also could increase the meteoroid impact exposure faced by satellites in near-Earth orbit for as long as a decade.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Groundwater in the Colorado River basin won't run out — but eventually we won't be able to get at it, scientists warn
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Stark new satellite data reveal that the Colorado River basin has lost huge amounts of groundwater over the last few decades, with some research suggesting that this groundwater could run out by the end of the century. But is that really the case? And if so, what could be done to prevent that happening? While groundwater is being depleted, it's unlikely the water will ever run out completely. However, continued drainage of the basin could make the water table fall so far it's basically inaccessible, experts told Live Science. The Colorado River snakes through seven U.S. states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona and California) and two Mexican states (Baja California and Sonora). Some 40 million people, including those in Phoenix and Las Vegas, depend on it for their water needs. But as supplies of this surface water have dried up over the past two decades — reaching record lows — more and more people have been pumping groundwater from far below the surface, mainly for agricultural use. To get a better idea of how much groundwater is being extracted, Jay Famiglietti, director of science for the Arizona Water Innovation Initiative at Arizona State University, and his colleagues turned to data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and GRACE Follow-On satellite missions. These satellites track changes in Earth's gravity field to measure shifts in the amount of water above and below the ground, and when combined with data on snowpack, surface water and soil moisture, this information can allow scientists to estimate how much groundwater has been depleted. The researchers estimate that since 2003, pumping from wells has drained about 28 million acre feet (34 cubic kilometers) of groundwater from the Colorado River Basin. This is akin to the capacity of Lake Mead, the largest U.S. reservoir, which sits behind the Hoover Dam on the Colorado River. The study was published May 27 in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. About three-quarters of the groundwater depletion is happening in the river's lower basin, largely in Arizona, where water is pumped from desert aquifers to irrigate farmland, according to the study. In these largely rural areas, farms aren't usually hooked up to municipal water systems, and instead rely on water pumped from wells on the property. Because the wells are private, there is often no municipal, county- or state-level measurement of how much water they are drawing up. Famiglietti and his colleagues estimate that annual groundwater losses in the basin averaged more than 1.2 million acre-feet (1.5 cubic kilometers) and if the trend continues, it could lead to water shortages and limit food production. "We're passing a critical point where it is getting more and more expensive to go deeper into the aquifer, and the water quality is dropping," Famiglietti said. Dozens of wells have dried up in the area. Collapsing aquifers have caused land subsidence, and created fissures. Ryan Mitchell, chief hydrologist at the Arizona Department of Water Resources, who was not involved in the new study, told Live Science that he welcomes the paper's findings and is concerned about the levels of estimated groundwater depletion in some areas. However, he takes issue with a sentence in the paper that suggests that an Arizona Department of Water Resources simulation indicated "complete depletion by the end of the century." He said the simulations don't indicate complete depletion of groundwater at all, let alone by the end of the century. The groundwater won't run out, he said, but neither GRACE satellite data nor measurements of water use will tell us exactly how much water is left in aquifers. "It's almost like it's an unknowable number in the same way that if someone said how many grains of sand are on the beach, you could make some assumptions and make some guesses but you can never actually know the exact amount of sand grains," Mitchell said. Bridget Scanlon, a research professor in the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin, and her team recently used GRACE data to assess the implications of drought in the Colorado River basin. They saw similar patterns, finding that there was a period of high groundwater use as irrigation expanded between the 1940s and 1970s. Then, the amount of groundwater recovered during a wet period in the early 1980s and 1990s. Related: Atlantic ocean currents are weakening — and it could make the climate in some regions unrecognizable But since then, the picture has differed depending on how areas are managed. In "active management areas," or areas where water use is monitored, the levels of groundwater have stayed roughly level. In these areas, groundwater is pumped, but based on how much is drawn up, management agencies can divert more water to the depleted area to filter back down to the aquifer. In unmanaged areas, no agency tracks how much groundwater is pumped, so agencies don't know when to replenish the aquifers. High extraction in unmanaged areas is driving the overall draining of groundwater, Scanlon told Live Science. "We can't manage what we don't measure," he said. "It shows that if you have rules in place and you keep a close eye on water use and you actively manage it, you can kind of keep it at a sustainable level." One thing is for sure: Waiting for precipitation to end the drought and replenish aquifers won't be enough. Studies imply that the flow of the Colorado River is expected to continue to decline thanks to climate-linked reductions in snowfall and rainfall — and that means there will be less surface water to use, less water to recharge aquifers and more reason to extract water from underground. Drilling deeper wells is one solution, but there are problems with that, Famiglietti said. At some point, it will cost millions of dollars for a deep-enough well that will have high energy costs to pump water, he said, and that water is likely to require treatment. "As you go deeper into the groundwater, that water has been sitting around in contact with soil and rocks for a long time, so it's dissolving solids and salts," Famiglietti said. This can lead to water that is salty, poor-tasting or that contains high levels of arsenic. "And because these are often refilled by agricultural water, they [are] collecting higher concentrations of pesticides and fertilizer," Famiglietti said. Another option is to reduce water use, by, for example, changing what is farmed, to shift from water-intensive crops like alfalfa, Famiglietti said. "It can't be business as usual," he said. "We have to think about what our priorities are for water use." "I'm as concerned about tomorrow as I am about 100 years from now," he said. 'It's very clear that we need more groundwater management in the lower basin, which is mostly in Arizona. Only 18% by area is managed, and there's an awful lot of depletion happening outside of those areas." Every expert Live Science talked with suggested that extending the area covered by active water management areas would help — first, by keeping tabs on what is being used where, and then trying to replace what is used. As part of such schemes, water could be brought in from elsewhere, Scanlon said. For example, this already happens when San Antonio buys water and pipes it from East Texas more than 150 miles (240 kilometers) away. RELATED STORIES —Atlantic ocean currents are weakening — and it could make the climate in some regions unrecognizable —Over half of the world's largest lakes and reservoirs are losing water —'Precipitation, the source of all fresh water, can no longer be relied upon': Global water cycle pushed out of balance 'for 1st time in human history' "Groundwater is a finite resource," Mitchell said. "You need to be able to let it recharge naturally or be able to replenish what you use. He said Scanlon's research shows that "we're doing OK in the active management areas, and we're not doing so hot in the areas where we don't have some kind of framework in place." A legislative bill to extend the areas that are actively managed has been proposed in Arizona, but similar ones have stalled after facing opposition. Those opposed say restricting water doesn't protect existing agricultural use of groundwater and will stifle economic growth. Some also object to water use being decided at the state level when they would prefer smaller water districts with locally elected directors. "We're not trying to spy on anyone; we just want to know what the water uses are," Mitchell said. "But it's hard because trust in governments is at an all-time low. We are trying to put things in place to help the mom-and-pop domestic wells — those folks who can't afford to drill 2,000-foot [600 meters] wells because it's just too deep and too expensive. We want to try to help them protect their water resources."
