Scientists find evidence of humans making clothes 120,000 years ago

Scientists find evidence of humans making clothes 120,000 years ago


>But mysteries remain including what the resulting outfits would have looked like, and whether they were primarily used for protection against the elements or more symbolic purposes. This was my immediate thought, too. Clothes for protection from the cold, from injury, etc makes good logical sense as an origin. I wonder when clothing tipped to be about modesty and fashion?


It may have become a status symbol, as these protections were likely to be rare and costly. And thus something to be emulated socially, even beyond the survival aspect. This would lead to something of a natural selection, as those who used the clothings for whatever purpose were able to reproduce more succesfully, for many and obvious reasons.


This fully explains people in cities wearing multi-thousand dollar Canada Goose jackets.


I would not wear a Canada goose jacket as those things are aggressive and there's no telling how pissed off they would be being attached to a jacket


Besides, Bjork kinda killed that category already.


If you have a problem with canada gooses then you have a problem with me and I suggest you let that one marinate




Pitter patter


> those things are aggressive and there's no telling how pissed off they would be . . . There is no difference to their level of aggression if they hate you, or if they just randomly see you. source - they live all around me,


Nature finds a way.


Possibly the bird nest gave early webbing and knitting ideas.


The hunter/warrior wearing the bear helmet and skin and the teeth necklace as a display of strength and whatever other symbolism were attached to such powerful animal


It would fluctuate depending on how comfortable life is. Other wise it's all about function. You don't take a tool box of cool looking but useless tools to do a job if your life depends on it.


You're making humans to be more logical then they are. Humans are a bunch of superstitious, religious, everything-has-a-meaning apes and cultures could have been developed that would quite easily have said "you must carry this super cool toolbox around that doesn't help for much to keep the bad darkness juju away" and quite readily thought that their life depended on it regardless of how comfortable their life was.


https://youtu.be/0UnJIf_WTQs Yeah, it's important to remember we (homo) weren't necessarily always doing things strictly for survival.


I agree with this, but I do believe that our ancestors would have thought logically enough to make a correlation between animal fur and warmth. wearing your kill could have soo many additional social aspects to it but I would think that the original idea would be based out of function


That's the great mystery. Sometimes I wish we had time travel just to see all the thousands of beliefs and religions lost before we started writing things down 10000 years ago


I always wonder how much knowledge and culture has been lost. Heck, we've lost a ton stuff since when we could write it down as well. We've even lost movies from just a few decades ago due to celluloid degradation.


Just in the last year we've apparently lost a lot of news content including 9/11 media coverage due to Adobe ending support for Flash.


Religion and hats is a good example of this.


If I were to guess, about the time weaving was developed. That would have been the time clothes went from functional animal leather and furs, to something more artistic


For most of history, probably until the industrial revolution, clothes have been for utility and comfort Fashion is a creation made by the elites, or the wealthy/top of society Let’s take the Middle Ages in Europe. Around 85-90 percent of European people were farming, with the number changing based on the region’s farming abilities and wealth, and with the number gradually declining over time (now its around 2 percent or less for most developed nations) The elites were the top 2 percent, the ones who could afford to buy actual products and participate in “high culture” This is essentially what most people think of when they imagine the glorious medieval period, a time that was plagued by disease, slavery, war, and some of the lowest living conditions known to man. But we think of high culture which is represented in the how most people think that men wearing heels was common, when most of the population couldn’t even imagine buying them, or how we view the period as noble warfare with knights, and nobles sitting in palaces with colorful clothes. This was the life of the 2 percent, the people who could afford to wear clothes for the social status, and the same people who actually banned the general population from buying nice clothes > [law made to stop the commoners from buying nice clothing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumptuary_law) For the elite, clothing was almost always about social status or fashion, however for most people up until the 19th-20th century, it was a tool made for comfort and protection Edit: I think I got a bit off reach my b


Probably as simple as a hunter wearing a newer more fresh fur then their counterparts. Or fur that was trimmed better/more appealing to the eye.


there was the ice age then


>From the medieval fashion for pointy shoes to Victorian waist-squeezing corsets and modern furry onesies, what we wear is a window to our past. > >Now researchers say they have found some of the earliest evidence of humans using clothing in a cave in Morocco, with the discovery of bone tools and bones from skinned animals suggesting the practice dates back at least 120,000 years. > >The latest study adds further weight to the idea that early humans may have had something of a wardrobe. While some of this clothing was likely ceremonial, most of it was probably more about functionality and less about showing off.


"Ceremonial" is archeologist talk for "eh, who knows?"


I think they are too quick to chalk up any unknown behavior to religion and superstition, when they really don't know.


Usually yeah but i do think it fits here. Special clothes for battle, for religious ceremonies, for events like the solstice etc


As the fur went away, the clothes came to stay.


And thanks to the furry onesies, clothes have now come full circle


Furry onesies are still used in ceremonial ways


Does putting on my Snuggie before I smoke a joint count?


Fuck yes it counts!


I love you


Love you too ❤️


I’m sure furries use onesies in more ways than just ceremonial.


That’s the real ceremony afterall


I saw a thing where scientists estimated when humans started wearing clothes by using genetics to see how long ago head lice and body lice evolved into separate species.


Then their feet hurt and the cobbler said "yay!"


Modesty was forced upon humanity.


Our furless bodies and thin skin probably necessitated clothes in many climates. ‘Modesty’ came later.


Interesting that homo erectus expanded quite far into Asia 2 million years ago - some pretty cold regions that would have required clothes of some kind for survival. They had sophisticated stone tools and javelins, so it doesn't seem a stretch that they'd be draping fur over themselves to keep warm.


Its very probable that tools they made simply haven't been found yet or that they didn't survive to the present day. Trying to find a literal needle in on a continent is kinda hard.


Needles are so old they're not even exclusive to homo sapiens: > A needle made from bird bone and attributed to archaic humans, the Denisovans, estimated to be around 50,000 years-old, and was found in Denisova Cave.


I remember being just awestruck reading an article about that needle. The photo of it was phenomenal.




>Denisovans - named after the cave The whole story of the naming of Denisovans is so weird. Denisova Cave itself was named that because an 18th-century hermit named Denis lived in it, so it was essentially just "Denis' Cave". So here we have a religious hermit from the 1700s chilling out in a cave, and a couple of centuries later an entire new species of human is named after him.


Thanks for referencing this.


The next big invention in that regard being the sewing needle (circa -30,000 with current knowledge.)


Yes, I would think wearing furs is nearly as old as killing large animals.


Is that a biblical reference? Modesty might have been forced on humans that chose to adapt to living in cooler climates. Maybe that's what you were saying...


That's not really modesty, that's about survival. The rise of organized religion and more organized governments definitely pushed modesty upon people as they were expected and often commanded to follow societal 'norms.'


You better hide those devil nipples!


But only if female apparently


For the best. Most people look better with clothes on.


>Modesty was forced upon humanity. Nope... that is a (no puns intended) a modern human though... Lets look at history and human evolution to become "the hairless ape"


If it is less about showing off, then why do chimps put grass in their ear? example 2: https://i.imgur.com/ZTOuVbI.jpg example 3: https://i.imgur.com/Mb1oBwn.jpg I think it has always been a lot about showing off. :D


Those may be mating rituals lol, but then again that kind of lends support to your theory.


Well, if you have identical twins and one of them has a big bone inside his nose, it is pretty easy to choose which one to fuck.


Ah, the big boner theory.


I’m honestly fascinated by the idea that I’m probably assuming incorrectly and that pretty much sums up sexual preferences.


Yo his AirPods got drip doe 😳


He didn't go to Jared


"Likely... probably..." They don't know shit about that.


I imagine it happened pretty quickly. Like the day someone knitted something and put it on, others wanted to do the same.


Hey Oog what's that thing? Oh this it's a loin cloth, keeps the mosquitoes and horse flies from bitting my dick. Oh neat Oog can I have one?


A great part of being human is showing off to impress the other sex. I would say it’s likely that their clothes were not just functional but also made to impress.


It baffles my mind that Humans have been around 200,000 years~ but didn't really have any kind of civilization till 10,000 BC and then you see the advancement made between 1000 and 2000 AD It's like WTF were we doing for 190,000 years.


10.000 years ago was also the time our climate got stable. Before that it was common to really fluctuate over the centuries and people theorize that was what prevented long term development. See [here](https://www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc/sites/default/files/Figure2_primer_updated2014r2.png): Everytime it got warm before it got cold immediately after. Now last time for some reason it stayed warm and stable. And boom, culture.


I'm not sure if we can say with complete certainty that there weren't periods of advancement in pre-history. Not like 1000AD on, but perhaps civilizations similar to early Greece, just many millennia before. Glaciers completely wiped huge sections of the earth to gravel, there were massive floods, seas rising, volcanos, and asteroid strikes. There could have been periods of advancement that were completely wiped out without a trace. Humanity could have been on the upswing before the last ice age and been hit with a big reset. We'll probably never know, but I suppose it's possible.


Living in accordance with natural law. Mustve been doing something right to have survived so long and sustainably without destroying the earth


There is a hypothesis that clothing drove human development by way of sexual attraction to those who wear them


Bear in mind, if you are hunter draped in the furs of fearsome beasts you've killed, it's will become rather apparent to a potential mate that you have the skills


I caught you a delicious bass.


Tina you fat lard come get some dinner!


good, now take it off your dong and cook it


I'm something of a wardrobe myself.


Glad to know I am in line with my ancestors as my entire wardrobe is utilitarian only. Fashion is just ornamental embellishment.


Imagine being a cave person at the beginnings of humanity only to have someone in the future internet reduce your drip to only functional. It’s a fit for the ages


I would loved to have seen the T-shirts with slogans of the day. “We came down from the trees for this?” Wonder what the memes of the day were.


The more things change, the more they ooga booga.


I'm with Ooga-Booga →


*If you can't handle me at my ooga* *You don't deserve me at my booga*


This applies in modern times.


"Honey, come to bed" "I can't, someone is wrong on a cavepainting"


I wrestled a saber tooth tiger and all I got was this lousy t-shirt


I ❤️ Pangaea


I ❤🦖


[Pangea broke up about 200 million years ago.](https://www.britannica.com/place/Pangea)


It’s from the retro tee trend of 120k years ago


Neanderthals Rule


Homo sapiens enter the ~~chat~~ village...


If this caves a rockin…




Africa is for lovers.


As a Virginian, I love this one. We have the same slogan. I like to think everyone loves their home.


I'm from Virginia, I see it everywhere.


"I evolved walking on 2 legs and all i got was this lousy t-shirt"


probably something about anti-clothers


Good money it’s the same dick and yo mama jokes as today…. Except there’s a good chance they were polyamouris back then so I bet that provided a lot of material


[Ancient Roman graffiti was just as crass as ours](https://kashgar.com.au/blogs/history/the-bawdy-graffiti-of-pompeii-and-herculaneu)


I just want you to know this comment made my day. Not sure why but it got me good.


Oh, thanks. I love all the slogans too. r/worldnews can be a downer sometimes but redditors make light of everything.


Born in the wrong generation


“Make Cave Great Again!” “Just do it…or I smash you with rock.” “Me lovin’ it.” “Maybe its mud-on-my-face.” “A diamond is forever.”


Eat my loincloth.


Scientists find evidence of strip clubs 119,999 years ago.


Women still didn't get pockets back then either.


Well, it gets fucking cold, what did you think they did, sleep naked and covered up in leafs?


We can make educated guesses, but proof is better


I really think human civilization goes far beyond the established timeframe of '10 thousand years'. I really wouldn't be surprised if large civilizations existed 30-100 thousand years ago, all traces lost to time.


I think that depends on what you consider “civilization.” That’s the age of *cities* but human culture assuredly goes back as far as modern humans, so at least 200K years.


At least in my idiolect, which I won't push on anyone else, civilization should mean cities only, by etymology alone (Civil <- Civitas in Latin). Culture is the right word for all that *stuff* that differentiates us from other people. Civilization is one of those things that make up a society's culture. Nomads have rich traditions, industry, writing, ect, but not civilization. Culture is trickier for me to define. The 200k year timespan is reasonable if culture can be defined by just the physical stuff a society has and others don't. If there's need for the symbolic (whether language or gestures or body painting), in the definition of culture, the date might be just on the maximum age of human culture. The earliest potential evidence of humans possessing the symbolic was found around this time -- the use of red ochre to decorate and differentiate. Interestingly, but maybe coincidentally, the first gravesite are found around 75k BCE -- right around the possible Toba eruption and human population bottleneck. The dating coincidence makes me wonder if there wasn't a connection between Toba, the genetic bottleneck, and the development of, basically, modern symbolic culture. Language is another matter. Edit: There most likely wasn't a connection between Toba and a bottleneck. It was a well-debated theory when I was keeping up with this stuff, but more recent archeology suggests Toba was less destructive than we thought. My dates a little off too.


If early hominids had no unique physical tools but did have oral calls/proto-words, would that set of calls be culture? But then, isn’t whalesong also enough for culture? I’d argue yeah


Yeah I’m with you. Culture has to be relative, in many ways, to the development of the people.


Geertz would say that culture is "webs of significance" and are constructed of religious beliefs and practices, cultural customs, social interactions, attitudes and behavior -- everything around us that we have constructed as rational beings capable of thought and imagination. > The dating coincidence makes me wonder if there wasn't a connection between Toba, the genetic bottleneck There isn't https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAnthropology/comments/43fp5p/how_did_the_early_humans_live_after_the_toba/


Thanks for clearing that up for me; I'll forget about Toba for the time being (maybe until it erupts again). The paper by Henn et al. was pretty cool. The progressive small-scale colonization model explains the distribution patterns of genetic and linguistic diversity very neatly. It's certainly a more pleasant story than one involving global catastrophe :). It does leave open a wonderful, big question (among some smaller ones): what might have caused that first successful migration out of Africa too. I'd forgotten his name, but I recall reading Geetz's cockfighting paper at some point in school. The notion of culture as (human-spun) "webs of significance" is certainly a definition I can subscribe to. Back in school, I sometimes pictured culture as a lattice of meaning with more than two dimensions, but that was a daydream more than anything else. Though, I think the analogies are getting at the same idea.


Large civilizations tend to leave very large and expansive evidence so its extremely unlikely we would not have found marks of them. As in we can track Roman metal production by looking at the pollution in left in glaciers kind of evidence.


The Arctic wasn't always frozen in places we attribute to today, also the large deserts were once wetlands with much vegetation. It's possible traces are left in those places which are largely vacant today.


I'm pretty sure you're referring to Antarctica that stopped being to only barely support shrubs over 3-4 million years ago and was already a massive desert. If you are actually referring to the Artic, then it started to freeze over 65 million years ago.


That's looking in the wrong direction - the sea is where lost civilisations lie. Coastlines and low lying river deltas would have been perfect for early homo sapiens, much as they remain even now to our modern society, however, any proto-civilisations are permanently lost to us because our [current sea level is significantly higher than during the last glacial period.](https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Map-illustrating-the-emergent-parts-of-the-continental-shelves-worldwide-during-the-last_fig5_255542619) Those likely sites of habitation are now under 100 metres of sea, completely eroded, covered by sediment. There's almost no chance that any of the sensitive biological evidence survived that long, and the extreme cost and difficulty of examining underwater archaeological sites means we can't undertake proper research, but we're constantly teased by evidence like Mesolithic artefacts washing up in Northern Europe, [likely from the now submerged Doggerland.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland)


Fishermen and the like are constantly dragging stuff up from Doggerland. Bones, tools, all sorts. It's a fascinating look into our past, but nothing they have found indicates a lost "civilisation".


That's because all the spaceships are too heavy to be pulled around by the current. /s


It is fascinating how quickly the earth erodes anything and everything. Aliens could have came and chilled on this planet for centuries a hundred thousand years ago and as long as they remembered not to leave metal behind, we would never be the wiser.


Metal erodes also


How long does it take for the crust to fully be consumed and recycled by the earth? 250 million years? 1 billion years? If so that would hide a lot of things. Edit: looks like about [500 million years](https://www.livescience.com/15512-earth-crust-cycling-faster.html). So Earth’s crust could have recycled 8 times in 4 billion years.


Some parts, like the Canadian shield, have been around for billions of years largely intact


Where’s that?




there's a disccusion about this in a stackechange thread I found few years ago (worldbuilding? Can't remember), the conclusion is there could've been 2-3 civilizations before us that could've been completely erased by natural geological, elemental cycle since the formation of earth, 2-3 time windows for civilization to develop, collapse, and be completely erased by geological cycle. Sadly I didn't save it and can't find that thread anymore cuz google has become sucker over the years, if anyone knows, please share the link


*hints blunt* Woah, dude...


Don't just hint it!


Metal disappears quite fast actually, like a family member had a car stowed away on a field of grass and it totally disappeared in 30 years.


I left my wallet on a bar counter once, and it was completely gone by the time I came back from the bathroom. Nature is fucking wild.




It completely disappeared, we visited regularly ever since we were kids and I saw the progress over the years. It was a Volkswagen beetle.


He's probably being a little dramatic, but a car sitting in an empty field for decades would deteriorate rapidly in a single life time. Several life times and it would be unrecognizable.


Check out the Wonderwerk Cave, we have evidence of human activity there from almost 2 million years ago. If aliens were doing *anything* more advanced than human stone age technology we'd find traces of them.


That is why they left us the pyramids


Exactly what I was thinking. 120,000 is still relatively recent


The good ole days


Traces of such old civilizations would hardly be lost. We find fossils that are hundreds of millions of years old. We find humanoid remains that are millions of years old (for example Ardipithecus 4.4 million years). Thanks to DNA analysis we can evaluate population sizes of Homo Sapiens Sapiens and know that for most of our history we were very, very few and lived very nomadic. As soon as you have early civilizations you get extremely good evidence that they existed. For example most of our main food sources were first domesticated in modern day Turkey/Iran (wheat, cows, pigs, sheep/goats etc). The cradle of civilization. Even small human populations leave many traces. In and around small stone age settlements/caves you'll find thousands of artifacts that are clearly left behind by humans.


> For example most of our main food sources were first domesticated in modern day Turkey/Iran (wheat, cows, pigs, sheep/goats etc). The cradle of civilization. Göbekli Tepe is one of the most interesting "mystery" of the time. The "leap of faith" seems, to me, to accept that a ritual/festive monumental architecture (enormous common effort over years, decades) preceded states. Once leaped, a lot of it begins to make a lot more sense. Early beer culture, for instance.


The issue with this is our wisdom teeth. Once we developed farming we started eating a less diverse diet. This is noticed in our wisdom teeth and we have dates showing when our bodies adapted to this. Without farming how would those large civilizations exist and if they did farm why haven't we found fossils with changed jaws? It could be possible that humans met up during special occasions but I feel like humans were pretty territorial(too lazy to fact check how the tribes/villages lived) so it might not have been safe.


Your most likely right. The oceans have risen a lot since then and we tend to always live near water/coast. Anything from the time has been consumed by the sea. Everything else just for erosion in general. This is why we only find things that old in caves. It's just so hard to find it anywhere else. So the problem is since there is no evidence we can't prove it. We can only have theories


True, I got flabbergasted when I found out that the North Sea, located between UK, Danmark and Norway used to be dry land just recent as 12000 years ago. The amount of old human relics across the world lost on the bottom of the ocean is staggering.


Ignoring of course the improbability that said civilizations would have somehow decided to entirely ignore the resource rich interior areas that we have for thousands of years built major urban centers in. Big civilizations have dramatic impacts on their environment throughout the ages that are pretty damn trackable to this day.




Every time ancient history gets brought up in news subreddit there will be some kind of ancient aliens, lost advanced civilizations or mud flood nonsense almost 2 replies deep and heavily upvoted.


The Celtic empire is interesting to me. It was vast, stretching to modern day Russia! In fact, in the story of the founding of Rome, this was more than likely the empire which held the brothers whom would found Rome hostage. They even had roads and possibly advanced tools.


You know they had roads, advanced tools, giant temples, palaces and more thousands of years before Rome? Rome is about as equidistant from us as they are to peak copper/bronze age civilisations from them 4500 years ago they had metal armour, weapons and tools, writing, roads, pretty much global trade networks (From the UK to Afghanistan at least) Celtic empire isn't very impressive on a technology level, its certainly cool, but far more advanced civilisations lay before it


The found the first brand logo a small etched sabertooth tiger


Wake up Ukk-Gash, new sabertooths just dropped.


Morocco really has some underated history.


Yet I still have to search literally years to come across decent fitting jeans. All the ones that fit are either to big in the waist or make me look like I've got an erection. Is it really that abnormal to have big thighs?..


I've found my clothing soul mate.


We’re just going to keep on finding evidence that our ideas of history are as shallow as we’ve dug so far… It’s awe-inspiring how ancient and unknown the human story is


There were scientists 120000 years ago?!


Also known as the amount of time my dad keeps a t-shirt.


Even a bridge and wooden stairs still intact


120,000 years? I can barely wrap my brain around that. Wow.


Wait till you hear about the dinosaurs


Clever girl.


This is absolutely incredible and really shows how man-made technology didn't really evolve much for millions of years. Considering how rapidly the world has changed in just 30 years, it blows my mind that 1,000s and 100,000s of years into the future they're going to look back at today as a very critical and special period in human history. It's really cool to be alive right now.


But how, and why though? Why did we not change for 100’s of thousands of years? What makes us so special now that we have changed more in the last 1,000 years versus the last 1,000,000? Don’t even get me started on the last 300. It literally makes no sense.


There are a shit fuck ton more of us now We have easy accessible global communication with literally everyone else. We have ideas everyone in the past wrote down.


There's that guy that everyone calls a quack who's said that humanity has been getting blasted in the ass by nature for 200k years and then everything got more stable recently say for the last 10k years. I'll bet $100 that he's somewhat correct.


So what was the thinking before this discovery, that everyone walked about completely naked?


The thinking was that we don't know. It's ok to admit that we don't know certain things.


No but you have to prove they didn't... that's the tricky part


It's about getting proof.


Is that really that strange of a thought?


I mean, many early humans at least in Africa probably DID.


Somebody had to invent clothing at some time, and before that everyone would be walking around naked.


Also found on clothes is the earliest human writing saying: Made in China.


This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/sep/16/scientists-find-evidence-of-humans-making-clothes-120000-years-ago) reduced by 83%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Now researchers say they have found some of the earliest evidence of humans using clothing in a cave in Morocco, with the discovery of bone tools and bones from skinned animals suggesting the practice dates back at least 120,000 years. > While skins and furs are unlikely to survive in deposits for hundreds of thousands of years, previous studies looking at the DNA of clothing lice have suggested clothes may have appeared as early as 170,000 years ago - probably sported by anatomically modern humans in Africa. > While Hallett said it was possible the bone tools could have been used to prepare leather for other uses, the combined evidence suggests it is likely - particularly for fur - that the early humans made clothes. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/pphc4o/scientists_find_evidence_of_humans_making_clothes/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~598582 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Human**^#1 **early**^#2 **tool**^#3 **years**^#4 **clothing**^#5


The first met gala


What was the earliest evidence of clothing before this?


They were no longer naked AND afraid.


I don’t know why everyone would be surprised about this: No matter the age, chafing always has and will always be one of man’s greatest enemies.


I'm sure that even back then, the ladies were complaining about the fit and lack of pockets. Some things never change.


Grog, does my forehead look big in this fur dress?


There was a study done in 2011 ([source](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3002236/)) that tried to estimate when head lice and clothing lice diverged: ​ >... use a Bayesian coalescent modeling approach to estimate that clothing lice diverged from head louse ancestors at least by 83,000 and possibly as early as 170,000 years ago. Which is interesting given the data discussed here.


[artist recreation ]( https://c8.alamy.com/comp/2D0J5MG/lady-gaga-stands-backstage-in-a-meat-dress-at-the-2010-mtv-video-music-awards-in-los-angeles-california-september-12-2010-reutersmike-blake-united-states-tags-entertainment-mtvbackstage-2D0J5MG.jpg )


Lol, no shit. Cold is cold. Now if they found a 120,000 year old clothing line…now that would be something!


Scientists have unearthed two skeletal remains that are clothed in squirrel fur; they have named them "Pinhead Larry" & "Dirty Dan". This proves the theory of "Survival of the Idiots" is 100% true.


The Hyborean Age?


The age of Conan the Barbarian?


“Spatulates from Bovid Bones” is my new favorite phrase. So much fun to say 😂


Humans were making a lot more than clothes back then.


But But earth is 6000 years old and God made Adam and Eve.


Yeah, being naked outside usually sucks


The first thing we did with thumbs is find a way to not look at balls so much.


Uggs I assume?


Is it just me or does this dig site look cozy AF?


A disaster made mankind disappear. Tens of thousands of years later, human beings learned to use fire and make clothes again?


The archeology professor at my college when you would see him in a bar he was likely to reach in his pocket and pull out an ancient hand axe, saying I’ll bet I’m the only person here who has one of these.


That’s impossible the Bible says the earth is only around 6000 years old


Damn! Read the title as "making clones"...


Same, was freaking out for a second lol