Study pinpoints when bow and arrow came to North America

Radiocarbon results suggest a single origin and rapid diffusion through cultural transition networks.

See full article...

 

[DeeplyUnconcerned]

Arrows are the kind of technology that would have just made everyone who encountered it immediately go “I need me some of that good shit.” The leap in effectiveness and risk reduction to the hunter is so obvious and significant that it’d be incredibly desirable.

That’s… the opposite of what the article says, though? At least in the north?

They weren't throwing the javelin and atlatl while standing on the angled part of a hill. They were throwing from the top of a scissor lift,

Reading this, I initially assumed “they” were ancient hunters, and got very confused when I hit “scissor lift”.

 

[DeeplyUnconcerned]

LOL… that’s one of those situations where I knew what I meant so didn’t notice I was being unclear.

It was clear as soon as my train of thought finished jumping tracks

 

[DeeplyUnconcerned]

In theory an arrow can compensate for lower mass with increased velocity. A simple bow would get you two to four times the projectile velocity of an atlatl, depending on size, with maybe a quarter of the projectile weight. So in terms of kinetic energy (mass times the square of velocity) a bow could easily be advantageous.

I would’ve assumed, as a first approximation, that the main determinant of kinetic energy would be how much could be transferred from the muscles, rather than the properties of the projectile? Does a bow being powered by both arms do better or worse than a spear using one arm but also at least some of the torso? And does a spear gain advantage from being a single motion rather than draw-hold-loose (these obviously not being compound bows)?