Forbidden Archeology_ The Full Unabridged Edition - Michael A. Cremo [247]
Lee (1983, p. 58) added: “An adequate explanation must also include the evidence in the Middle Quarry area near the high point of the hill, where unsorted artifact-bearing deposits are perched on the top of a ridge. There is no place from which soil could have crept, unless we can conceive of it crossing a swamp and climbing a ridge.” Lee (1983, p. 59) concluded the deposits had been left on the ridge, and elsewhere, by glaciers.
Lee also considered other possible explanations for the presence of stone implements deep in unsorted deposits. One was that the deposits had been churned by the action of frost. But Lee (1983, pp. 59–60) pointed out: “If frost action has been churning the unsorted deposits, it is difficult to see why the artifact assemblages are not thoroughly mixed. . . . Frost churning cannot account for superimposed assemblages, typologically and quantitatively different, within the unsorted deposits. The occurrence of undisturbed horizontal lenses of fine gravels and sands in the lower half of the till deposits, sometimes with artifacts directly under them, is conclusive evidence that frost action did not severely affect the lower beds.” The introduction of tools into the deposits by tree roots was considered and rejected for the same reasons.
Summarizing his findings, T. E. Lee (1983, p. 71) wrote: “Various explanations for the unsorted artifacts-bearing deposits have been considered, including tree plowing, root slumping, beach action, ice rafting, frost action, viscous flow, and soil creep. Although these factors may have been operative in a minor way, they do not explain the main body of the observed evidence. The suggestion of glacial till, on the other hand, is favored and supported by the nature of the deposits and their peculiar position on the site; the faceted stones, many of which are striated; the distribution and condition of encased artifacts; the occurrence of sand ‘lumps’; and the presence of certain horizontal lenses of sorted sands, which are typical of till.”
Sanford visited the Sheguiandah site several times during the period 1952–1957. In agreement with Lee, Sanford (1983, p. 82), a professional geologist, found the unsorted artifact-bearing layers to be glacial till: “There is no doubt in the writer’s mind that this is till, although its origin has been questioned. It is made of a heterogeneous mixture of material ranging from clay to boulders.” Sanford, for the same reasons as Lee, believed that neither frost, nor root action, nor mudflows could explain the formation of the layers in question and the presence in them of stone tools. The layers of till were thin, but Sanford said this was to be expected because previous glaciations had stripped the region of materials that could have been incorporated into the tills.
Sanford (1971, p. 7) wrote: “Perhaps the best corroboration of these unsorted deposits as ice-laid till was the visit of some 40 or 50 geologists to the site in 1954 during the annual field trip of the Michigan Basin Geological Society. At that time the excavation was open and the till could be seen. The sediments were presented to this group in the field as till deposits, and there was no expressed dissension from the explanation. Certainly had there been any room for doubt as to the nature of these deposits it would have been expressed at this time.”
The belief that the Sheguiandah deposits are something other than glacial till is not confined to scientists holding the view that humans entered North America no earlier than 12,000 years ago. Even maverick researchers who accept a far more ancient date of entry hesitate about Sheguiandah because of the advanced nature of the stone tools found there. According to these researchers, early Americans, living in early Wisconsin and pre-Wisconsin times at sites such as Buchanan Canyon in San Diego and Calico in southern California, had a very primitive level of culture