We Found Something in Australia That Shouldn't Exist (Michael Button)

According to the textbooks, humans reached Australia about 60,000 years ago.

That number underpins everything we think we know.

But strange clues, scattered across the region, are starting to point to a much earlier presence.

Clues that suggest Australia’s history isn’t just older — but that the first humans here may not have been us.

Fire use, seafaring and dates that simply don’t make sense

So is it possible we have Australia’s deep history completely wrong?



Best comment on You Tube:

@OldChippy-s6o
Thanks Michael. I have consider that this was likely most of my life. We grew up with the idea of Neanderthals right across the world and it always occurred to be as strange that Australia was somehow left untouched. then with the relatively recent knowledge of Denisovans in PNG, which just 12k years ago was joined with Australia as the Sahul I knew I was on to something. Over here in Australia is extremely taboo to even suggest that Aboriginals were not the first. I put a post on to Reddit, carefully explaining my position in 'Unpopular opinion' just 2 months ago and it was moderated in about 20 minutes. Just a careful explanation, with references to dates, and ages and an proposal that suggested that Denisovans may have been there first, then mixed with the newcomers. Gone. The other outlier is the Mungo Man DNA tests. The oldest humanoid remains in the nation have been reburied, and the genome unrecovered. We have high density bone scans , but very few Denisovan bones to go off.

The last data point is that AMH's tend to wipe out animal populations when they arrive. Australian megafauna was wiped out 35-40k years ago, NOT 65k years ago. Which makes it more likely that us AMH's arrived later and older tools were the Deni's which had a similar tech level to us, and who DNA today make up 6% of Aboriginals. For people to understand the significant of 6%, if you had an ancestor 4 generations ago in your DNA that would be ~6.25%. For that number to be consistently across the Aboriginal population likely means significant mixing of populations or all Aboriginals ancestored back to a very small population. It's an interesting story, and I'm glad English and American's are on it, as we simply cannot discuss it back here with out the anti-racist people having a meltdown.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather2 blog, February 19, 2026.]