Who Discovered America Besides Columbus and the Vikings?

[Andre]

There is Columbus and the Vikings, now also the Chinese?

http://www.1421.tv/pages/evidence/content.asp?EvidenceID=12

... DNA tests show that in the Americas today there are 18 peoples whose forebears were settlers from Zheng He’s fleets. These people have lived separate lives to other native Indian peoples from that day to this. Many still understand Chinese and practise Chinese customs. China had thus settled the Americas before Columbus set sail - and done so on a grand scale...

Any more discoverers?

 

[selfAdjoint]

That's their point 1. Point 4 is "And the Maya are of course Chinese". Phooey. Find theose 18 "peoples". And do they mean "people", i.e. individuals, or "peoples", i.e. populations?

 

[ray b]

the native americans but they may have been the second wave from asia
the africans may have been here first based on olmec heads and DNA from
terria del fugo people

other claims of old world contac include many seafairers from phonican, roman, and irish but less proof any of these

 

[Lisa!]

I heard that Columbus found America by using the map of a (Muslim)chinese who had discovred America first.(perhaps that explains why China andOBL both has concentrated on US. 1 wants their lands, the other wants to convert them to Islam! )

China map lays claim to Americas

P.S. what I said first was the things that I heard in news. So I don't know if at this link there would be any mention of that!

 

[quantumcarl]

the native americans but they may have been the second wave from asia
the africans may have been here first based on olmec heads and DNA from
terria del fugo people

other claims of old world contac include many seafairers from phonican, roman, and irish but less proof any of these

There is evidence, as curcumstancial as it is, that around 20,000 (17,000 was the number sited) years ago some of the neanderthalian/cromagnon hybrid people made their way to NorthAmerica via ice flows and shifting ice during winter and spring from the western coasts of what is today "Europe".

The physical evidence of this forced-migration is found in the flint-knapping style of tools found in France and also on the east coast of North America, apparently dating from similar eras and being identical flint knapping in technique and in nature.

The hypothesis is backed up by computer models of how, 17,000 years ago, ice formed a bridge from the Nova Scotia - Maryland coastlines to the Great Britian and the French coastlines. The story goes that the Neanderthal/Cromagnon hybrid people would use the ice to get food in winter since seals were abundant out on the ice, away from land-based preditors.

Hunting parties would be out on the ice... 17,000 years ago... and could easily have been marrooned out there on the bergs of ice by storms or high seas.

The computer models show that, during that time, the currents in the Atlantic were running from east to west and could have easily carried any surviving seal hunters closer to the coasts of North America where they would naturally continue in their survival efforts and eventually populate the large, fertile continent. This would explain the strikingly similar tool making technology existing on both sides of the Atlantic from that time period.

There are geneology records that seem to back up this hypothesis as well... making it more of a theory that explains the population of North America by humans. Cool eh?!

 

[Mk]

China map lays claim to Americas

I think that map was discredited as a fake recently.

 

[Andre]

There is evidence, as curcumstancial as it is, that around 20,000 (17,000 was the number sited) years ago some of the neanderthalian/cromagnon hybrid people made their way to NorthAmerica via ice flows and shifting ice during winter and spring from the western coasts of what is today "Europe".
... Cool eh?!

How about 250,000 years:

http://www.alternativescience.com/evolution_gallery.htm

In the late 1960s Dr Viriginia Steen-McIntyre and Harold Malde, both of the U.S. Geological Survey and Roald Fryxell of Washington State University, were working under a grant from the National Science Foundation at a site called Hueyatlaco (pronounced way-at-larko) 75 miles south east of Mexico City.

Steen-McIntyre and her colleagues found very sophisticated stone tools there, rivalling the best work of Cro-Magnon man in Europe (similar to the design illustrated here.) The scientists applied four dating methods to the finds and the strata in which they were found: uranium series dating; fission track dating; tephra hydration dating and mineral weathering study. The four methods yielded a unanimous date of around 250,000 years.

This finding fundamentally contradicts the belief of anthropology not only in the New World but regarding the whole history of mankind. People capable of making the kind of stone tools found at Hueyatlaco are thought not to have come into existence until around 100,000 years ago, in Africa. Steen-McIntyre's findings were first ridiculed and then quietly forgotten about.

or more than a million??

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2005/11/30_fp.shtml

Alleged footprints of early Americans found in volcanic rock in Mexico are either extremely old - more than 1 million years older than other evidence of human presence in the Western Hemisphere - or not footprints at all, according to a new analysis published this week in Nature.

...

In all, the British team claims to have found 250 footprints - mostly human, but also dog, cat and cloven-hoofed animal prints - in a layer of volcanic ash deposited in a former lake bed now exposed near a reservoir outside Puebla. Its dating techniques returned a date of 40,000 years ago,
...

 

[Lisa!]

I think that map was discredited as a fake recently.

Intersting!


At the end of the article in my previou post:

Controversial claim

The map was bought for about $500 from a Shanghai dealer in 2001 by a Chinese lawyer and collector, Liu Gang.

According to the Economist magazine, Mr Liu only became aware of the map's potential significance after he read a book by British author Gavin Menzies.

The book, 1421: The Year China discovered the World, made the controversial claim that a Chinese admiral and eunuch, Zheng He, sailed around the world and discovered America on the way.

Zheng He, a Muslim mariner and explorer, is widely thought to have sailed around South East Asia and India, but the claim he visited America is hotly disputed.

The map is now being tested to check the age of its paper and ink, with the results due to be known in February.

Even if it does prove to have been drawn in 1763, sceptics will point out that we still only have the mapmaker's word that he copied if from a 1418 map, rather than from a more recent one.

 

[vanesch]

Any more discoverers?

There is of course the trivial fact that native americans were also ancient discoverers of the Americas

Depends what you call a "discoverer"...

 

[Lisa!]

At least I'm grateful that you didn't say the real discoverers were ants or other species that lived in Americas before humans!

 

[quantumcarl]

1.36 million year old tools found in Asia

At least I'm grateful that you didn't say the real discoverers were ants or other species that lived in Americas before humans!

I suppose it could have been the Chinese who were here first, after all... they've had 1.36 million years to do it~.

The stone tools were found in China's Nihewan Basin. During the period when they were used, 1.36 million years ago, much of the area was covered by a large lake that was ringed with forests of birch and elm trees. Mammals such as hippopotamuses, hyenas, rhinoceroses, and horses roamed the area.

While the climate was probably humid and warm most of the time, the area is thought to have experienced bouts of cold and dry weather. To settle in the region, early humans would have had to adapt to this climate fluctuation.

The stone tools are an indication of that early ability to thrive in a variable climate. They show that "early humans could live in a wide range of climate conditions," said one of the researchers, Rixiang Zhu of the Institute of Geology and Physics at the Chinese Academy of Science in Beijing. He and his collaborators published a report on their findings in the September 27 issue of Nature.

From:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0926_asiantools.html

After having my personal account of the 800,000 bp Arabic find of a friend of mine removed/erased/censored from this thread... I thought I'd better myself and give a source from the almighty net for y'all. Thank you.

 

[quantumcarl]

Here's a related site to confirm National Geographic and Nature on the 1.36 million year old tools found in the Nihewan Basin, China.

http://www.athenapub.com/stotochin.htm

Magnetic dating! Who woulda thought!? This article explains the technique well with diagrams etc...

 

[Andre]

Yes Magnetic dating is very commonly used for (multi)million time scales and has served as a imported calibration/verification tool for other dating methods.

Here is an important example:

http://www.lorraine-lisiecki.com/LisieckiRaymo2005.pdf

Check figure 4, the bands below the graph with the names "Brunhes", "Matuayma", "jaramillo", "olduval" etc indicate periods (chrons) of opposite magnetic polarisation. The boundaries are dated reasonably well and can be compared with the magnetic orientation of new samples, to determine the ages by its chron boundaries.

 

[quantumcarl]

Yes Magnetic dating is very commonly used for (multi)million time scales and has served as a imported calibration/verification tool for other dating methods.

Here is an important example:

http://www.lorraine-lisiecki.com/LisieckiRaymo2005.pdf

Check figure 4, the bands below the graph with the names "Brunhes", "Matuayma", "jaramillo", "olduval" etc indicate periods (chrons) of opposite magnetic polarisation. The boundaries are dated reasonably well and can be compared with the magnetic orientation of new samples, to determine the ages by its chron boundaries.

This is a nice turn of events. Mind you, magnetic dating won't help date more recent finds. Although, magnetic poles do move a fair distance over just 10s of thousands of years.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/29dec_magneticfield.htm

Around 80,000 years ago the magnetic north pole was more in the vicinity of Greenland and Iceland... today its more over northern Canada... and moving rapidly away toward Northern Alaska.

I wonder if these shifts can be researched and documented enough then used to date more recent human activity, say, in the 100,000s of years category?

I also wonder if reading stratas of lithospheric matrial or substrata for magnetically influenced direction is similar to taking an MRI reading where the protons of material can be discerned to be aligned in specific directions?

The reason I'm so interested is because I was an archaeologist for 12 years here in the NW. There wasn't much money in the profession. However, today, corporations are more likely to do environmental and anthropological studies before beginning any big projects.

I've spent many incredible years working to unravel the migration routes to North America (specifically the North West). Right now I can say that the "Bering Land Bridge" is about a 70-90% sure route while the route north from South America (DNA and Linquistial matches with the Tolmec and Olmec and Nishga FirstNations) is a definite 99% sure bet. Arrival via the Pacific is again a 99% sure bet with DNA and linguistical similarities showing up in the NW Haida FirstNations as related to the Hawiians. Can you dig it (pun intended)!?

 

[Tojen]

from quantumcarl,

Neanderthal/Cromagnon hybrid people

There's no evidence of any such critter, not even in our genes.

 

[quantumcarl]

There's no evidence of any such critter, not even in our genes.

Analyzing evidence takes expertise, money and time...

Please read the reputable article(s) and you may find some of the reactions to the discovery interesing as well:

Neandertal-Cro-Magnon Hybrid?
Analysis of skeletal remains buried in a Portuguese rock-shelter has yielded startling evidence that early modern humans and Neandertals may have interbred.
www.archaeology.org/online/news/neanderkid.html

Evolution - June 1999: Re: More balance on claimed Neandertal-Modern
and if this turns out to be a Neandertal-CroMagnon hybrid, it will be a minor exception that proves the rule. GM>If anti-evolutionists would ...

www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/199906/0315.html

Evolution - June 1999: Re: More balance on claimed Neandertal ...
>hypothesis, and if this turns out to be a Neandertal-CroMagnon hybrid, ... >hybrid was the product of Neanderthal female-Cro-Magnon male mating, for ...

www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/199906/0346.html

More results from www.asa3.orgPlease respond with references that defend your comment claiming that there is no evidence of Neandertal genetics in the genome of modern man.

Do you have references that report on the genome of Neandertals?
Do you have references that show the absence of Neandertal genes in modern humans?

 

[Tojen]

quantumcarl,

Interbreeding between Neandertals and modern humans is a tantalizing subject, but I think the evidence so far shows that even if it was possible, it was either minimal or non-existant.

I read the archeology.org link and saw that it was based on visual interpretation of the skeleton, that is, it "looks" like it's part Neandertal. I also found these opponents of Trinkhaus's claims:

Christopher B. Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London, a proponent of a theory of more recent human origins in Africa, disagrees. The fossil youngster may be an unusually stocky modern human, Stringer holds. Even if further analysis confirms its hybrid status, he suspects that prehistoric interbreeding rarely occurred. Numerous fossils of early modern humans show no signs of Neandertal contacts, Stringer notes.

Another out-of-Africa advocate, Jeffrey H. Schwartz of the University of Pittsburgh, views the fossil child as a modern human who possibly suffered growth abnormalities that created a bulky lower body. "I don't see any evidence of hybridization," Schwartz remarks.
http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc99/5_8_99/fob7.htm​

As for the absence of Neandertal genes in modern humans:

While the authors explain that it's impossible to definitively conclude that no genetic flow occurred between early humans and Neandertals given the limited number of early human fossils available, they point out that even fossil samples considered as anatomically transitional between modern humans and Neandertals failed to show evidence of mtDNA exchange.
http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020080


These differences put the Neandertal genome well outside the limits of modern humans. Another interesting result is that the mtDNA sequence seemed equally distant from all modern groups of humans. In particular, it did not seem to be more closely related to Europeans, something that might have been expected if, as some scientists think, Neandertals were at least partly ancestral to them.

The Neandertal is not merely outside the human range, but well outside it.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/mtDNA.html​

 

[Evo]

There do not appear to be any DNA tests which have confirmed a hybrid cro-magnum/neandertal mix.

Here are posts from another thread this was discussed in.

Still, there is one more resource that is discovered in 1998 – mitochondrial DNA. The mtDNA of an apparently mixed Neanderthal/Cro-Magnon child discovered in Lapedo, Portugal in 1998 have yielded evidence that the Neanderthal and H. sapiens lines diverged 550,000 to 690,000 years ago.

Actually this child, referred to as the Lagar Velho child, has never been tested for DNA.

"Will DNA be extracted from the specimen?

All destructive analyses have to be justified in terms of potential empirical results, current technology, and interpretability. We are in contact with S. Pääbo regarding DNA extraction, but a decision has yet to be made as to whether we will attempt this in the near future (especially given the contamination of the bones seen in the attempted direct AMS radiocarbon dating). Moreover, we feel that it is necessary to establish a meaningful evolutionary framework for the interpretation of any ancient DNA that might be extracted from the specimen."

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache.../1999/lapedo/lapedofaq+Lagar+Velho+dna&hl=en"

 

[quantumcarl]

quantumcarl,

Interbreeding between Neandertals and modern humans is a tantalizing subject, but I think the evidence so far shows that even if it was possible, it was either minimal or non-existant.

I read the archeology.org link and saw that it was based on visual interpretation of the skeleton, that is, it "looks" like it's part Neandertal. I also found these opponents of Trinkhaus's claims:

Christopher B. Stringer of the Natural History Museum in London, a proponent of a theory of more recent human origins in Africa, disagrees. The fossil youngster may be an unusually stocky modern human, Stringer holds. Even if further analysis confirms its hybrid status, he suspects that prehistoric interbreeding rarely occurred. Numerous fossils of early modern humans show no signs of Neandertal contacts, Stringer notes.

Another out-of-Africa advocate, Jeffrey H. Schwartz of the University of Pittsburgh, views the fossil child as a modern human who possibly suffered growth abnormalities that created a bulky lower body. "I don't see any evidence of hybridization," Schwartz remarks.
http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc99/5_8_99/fob7.htm​

As for the absence of Neandertal genes in modern humans:

While the authors explain that it's impossible to definitively conclude that no genetic flow occurred between early humans and Neandertals given the limited number of early human fossils available, they point out that even fossil samples considered as anatomically transitional between modern humans and Neandertals failed to show evidence of mtDNA exchange.
http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020080These differences put the Neandertal genome well outside the limits of modern humans. Another interesting result is that the mtDNA sequence seemed equally distant from all modern groups of humans. In particular, it did not seem to be more closely related to Europeans, something that might have been expected if, as some scientists think, Neandertals were at least partly ancestral to them.

The Neandertal is not merely outside the human range, but well outside it.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/mtDNA.html​

Thank you for these references they're a great collection of data on the genome of a small sample of Neandertal subjects...

The studie's conclusions are based on a minimal and narrow sampling of mtDNA from 5 subjects that have been "fossilized". 1 is from 100,000 years ago, 1 is from 29,000 you and is a child and there are 3 others. Its not enough of a sample. Its highly probable that none of these subjects nor their lineage ever interbred with humans... but there's no doubt that others did... if only very few of them.

A very select few Neadertals would have been chosen by the Cromagnon for "romantic purposes". And it would be this select group that would have contributed genetics to the modern human genome. When this select group of Neandertals is found, their genetic sequencing will not be found to be as distant from the human genome as is thought.

You will note that the first sentence of the conclusion to this study at www.talkorigins.org doesn't rule out human neandertal interbreeding...

The studies of Neandertal mtDNA do not show that Neandertals did not or could not interbreed with modern humans.

This is because of the minimal nature of their sampling and how they can't rule out the diversity of the neandertal genome and how a few select features of their genes have probably made it into our own.

 

[Tojen]

You're welcome for the references to human subjects.

Yes, the studies are slim but they're all we have so far. I prefer to go with what they suggest.

 

[quantumcarl]

You're welcome for the references to human subjects.

Yes, the studies are slim but they're all we have so far. I prefer to go with what they suggest.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the Talk Origins site where they are debating the Creation Myth and Evolution. As I've said, the studies only examine a narrow sample. Researchers have been shown, many times, to skew results, especially when their from an incomplete sample, to please some official like Springer from an institution like the Natrual History Museum of London. These types of institutes and there staff have the most to lose if they are shown to be incorrect in their theories and so their defences become more important than the truth.

As for "Who Else Discovered America"... how about the Egyptians?

They definitely had a Trade Route with South America... this is evident in the findings of Dr Svetla Balabanova. Who was running chemical analysis' on some verified and certified mummies from 3000 years ago.

Then four years ago a German scientist, Dr Svetla Balabanova, made a discovery which was to baffle Egyptologists, and call into question whole areas of science and archeology to chemistry and botany.

She discovered that the body of Henut Taui (3000 year old Egyptian mummie) contained large quantities of cocaine and nicotine. The surprise was not just that the ancient Egyptians had taken drugs, but that these drugs come from tobacco and coca, plants completely unknown outside the Americas, unheard of until Sir Walter Raleigh introduced smoking from the New World, or until cocaine was imported in the Victorian era.

Read the whole article @
http://www.druglibrary.org/Schaffer/Misc/mummies.htm

South America is a stone's throw from North America and there is a high probablility that Egyptians traveled the Trade Route from Egypt to South Amercia... for whatever reasons, then, perhaps explored further North to North America... thus, becoming one or the many groups of "Who Else Discovered (North) America".

In fact, there are as yet unconfirmed reports of an Egyptian-like complex in the Grand Canyon:

Read the article on its whereabouts and the 1909 article about it from the Arizona Gazzette:

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_orionzone_9.htm

 

[Bystander]

"... but that these drugs come from tobacco and coca ..."

Objection! Author is leading the reader! The desired inference is that nicotine and cocaine can be found only in tobacco and coca leaves, and that just ain't the case.

 

[quantumcarl]

"... but that these drugs come from tobacco and coca ..."

Objection! Author is leading the reader! The desired inference is that nicotine and cocaine can be found only in tobacco and coca leaves, and that just ain't the case.

Please let us know what other plants are documented to contain nicotine and cocaine... specifically from the region around Egypt.

 

[Bystander]

http://mason.gmu.edu/~lrockwoo/Plantherbivoreinteractionssp02.htm

 

[Tojen]

quantumcarl,

Talkorigins has an agenda, but typical of the site, the article was well-researched (check the references at the end) and is representative of what I found among other serious, not just speculative, sites.

The idea of Egyptians traveling to and trading with the Americas is intriguing (and more plausible than Neandertal/Cro-Magnon hybrids), but the specific evidence is hardly conclusive right now. Speculating is fun but rumours of a lost "oriental" cavern in the Grand Canyon can hardly be called supporting evidence.

So far it's impossible to pin down just who was here first, but there's a lot of initial evidence cropping up that Native Americans were not the original settlers. The link to a European lineage in the DNA of Ojibway Indians about 15,000 years ago is pretty tantalizing but still not conclusive.

The best evidence so far, I think, is from the southern tip of the Baja Peninsula where, amazingly, it appears remnants of an earlier migration to the Americas were actually still living when the Spaniards arrived. (Sorry if you know this already, but a lot of people don't and I like to tell it ) Jesuit missionaries noted that the two tribes there, the Pericues and the Guaycura, were physically different--longer, narrower head shape, for example--from other tribes and spoke a language unrelated to any in the area.
http://www.bajacalifologia.org/english/doc.north.htm

Unfortunately, the civilizing influence of the missionaries was so successful that the Pericues had soon completely died out, and the last Guaycura died around 1900. The issue remained unresolved--until the Golden Age of DNA Analysis:

September 12, 2004 - Discovery

DNA analysis of skulls found in Baja California that belonged to an extinct tribe called the Pericues reveal that the Pericues likely were not related to Native Americans and that they probably predated Native Americans in settling the Americas.

The finding, released at the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BA) Festival of Science in Exeter, England, adds support to the theory that a number of groups arrived in the Americas via different routes and at varying times, possibly as early as 25,000 years ago.

The study also suggests that the two oldest known Americans — Peñon woman and Kennewick Man — might have belonged to the Pericues tribe.
http://www.crystalinks.com/pericues.html (this is a copy of the original article at Discovery.com which no longer exists)

The fact that there were probably living descendents of an earlier migration walking around in the 1800's is amazing to me, as is the fact that we ground them out of existence.

 

[quantumcarl]

http://mason.gmu.edu/~lrockwoo/Plantherbivoreinteractionssp02.htm

Bystander, I'm going to help you with your rather brief reply and reference which is far too vague and general to use as evidence that the Egyptians were using plants from their continental region to get high on. There is a way to determine what plants were used that left deposits of specific alkaloids in the hair folicles and nails and skin of the mummies in question.

Alkaloid-bearing plants all have a unique spectrum of alkaloids. If the drug tests done in Munich (on the mummies) tested only for the primary alkaloids cocaine and nicotine, then more tests could be made to definitively establish the plant strain, region, and season of harvest, all from the balance of secondary alkaloids.

This seems like the sensible way to resolve the origin of the alkaloids found in the 3000 year old mummies from Egypt. Of course, I'm requesting the tests be done immediately.

 

[quantumcarl]

quantumcarl,

Talkorigins has an agenda, but typical of the site, the article was well-researched (check the references at the end) and is representative of what I found among other serious, not just speculative, sites.

The idea of Egyptians traveling to and trading with the Americas is intriguing (and more plausible than Neandertal/Cro-Magnon hybrids), but the specific evidence is hardly conclusive right now. Speculating is fun but rumours of a lost "oriental" cavern in the Grand Canyon can hardly be called supporting evidence.

So far it's impossible to pin down just who was here first, but there's a lot of initial evidence cropping up that Native Americans were not the original settlers. The link to a European lineage in the DNA of Ojibway Indians about 15,000 years ago is pretty tantalizing but still not conclusive.

The best evidence so far, I think, is from the southern tip of the Baja Peninsula where, amazingly, it appears remnants of an earlier migration to the Americas were actually still living when the Spaniards arrived. (Sorry if you know this already, but a lot of people don't and I like to tell it ) Jesuit missionaries noted that the two tribes there, the Pericues and the Guaycura, were physically different--longer, narrower head shape, for example--from other tribes and spoke a language unrelated to any in the area.
http://www.bajacalifologia.org/english/doc.north.htm

Unfortunately, the civilizing influence of the missionaries was so successful that the Pericues had soon completely died out, and the last Guaycura died around 1900. The issue remained unresolved--until the Golden Age of DNA Analysis:



The fact that there were probably living descendents of an earlier migration walking around in the 1800's is amazing to me, as is the fact that we ground them out of existence.

Progress (genocide) is such a drag.

The link to a European lineage in the DNA of Ojibway Indians about 15,000 years ago is pretty tantalizing but still not conclusive.

I brought up this lineage in this thread where computer models of the climate cycles showed an ice-bridge and flow that would develop between where the UK and France are today and Nova Scotia and Maryland are today each winter around 17,000 years ago.

The whole theory began to develop when a method of flint-knapping (which was the high-technology of the time) from around 17,000 years ago in France was found to have been used, in an identical way, in New England dated to be around 17,000 to 15,000 years ago. I don't have the document sources right now but they can't be hard to find.

The premise is that the 17,000 year old French dudes and their high tech spear points and harpoons were out on the ice hunting seal and walrus for winter feed... much like the Inuit of today.

There's more than a high probability that a hunting party of women and men ended up stranded on an ice flow and, with enough food and shelter, rode it out to North America... which was in the direction of the Atlantic oceanic - winter - currents of the time.

There is an incredible difference between the Algonguin and Ojibway nation's morphologies and those of the West Coast's Stol'o, Nishga, Haida and Salish nations. However, who came first and when... is up in the air til the results are in. And there is no doubt in my mind that there were cross country Trade Routes between these peoples as well... leading to interbreeding etc ... all that romantic stuff.

 

[Tojen]

By coincidence, last night's Nova program dealt with this very subject, the search for the first visitors to the Americas, including the Ojibways DNA evidence and the possible Solutrean influence on the Clovis point. The flint-knapping technique is called an overshot (I couldn't remember the name, I had to look it up in the show's transcript http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3116_stoneage.html" ). One guy gave a good demonstration of it.

There's the chance that particular European lineage was also present in Asia but died out there after the migration to North America, but I get the feeling that's less likely than a direct migration. Also, I don't think a migration from Europe to North America would necessarily have to be an accident. It could have been deliberate, just as it was on the Pacific side. There seemed to be a wanderlust in our ancestors, by choice or not, that didn't stop where land ended.

If they did get here, that raises other points. Was there anyone else here when they arrived? They obviously didn't conquer the continent as their descendants did a few hundred years ago. And the European diseases which killed so many then had apparently not yet evolved.

Great stuff to ponder, anyway.

 

[quantumcarl]

By coincidence, last night's Nova program dealt with this very subject, the search for the first visitors to the Americas, including the Ojibways DNA evidence and the possible Solutrean influence on the Clovis point. The flint-knapping technique is called an overshot (I couldn't remember the name, I had to look it up in the show's transcript http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3116_stoneage.html" ). One guy gave a good demonstration of it.

There's the chance that particular European lineage was also present in Asia but died out there after the migration to North America, but I get the feeling that's less likely than a direct migration. Also, I don't think a migration from Europe to North America would necessarily have to be an accident. It could have been deliberate, just as it was on the Pacific side. There seemed to be a wanderlust in our ancestors, by choice or not, that didn't stop where land ended.

If they did get here, that raises other points. Was there anyone else here when they arrived? They obviously didn't conquer the continent as their descendants did a few hundred years ago. And the European diseases which killed so many then had apparently not yet evolved.

Great stuff to ponder, anyway.

Proven: Man in America by 15,000 B.C. (radiocarbon dating)

http://www.trussel.com/prehist/news199.htm

This is a good story but it shows a certain amount of development in tools took place between 17,000 and 12,000 years bp. The tools from the 15,000 to 17,000 ybp site are not clovis type points but a more "primative" type of core tool made from churt... usually a red stone that really flakes well. The site above it is from 12,000 through to 10,000 ybp and shows the knowledge and production of the clovis point.

This development could have taken place because of an introduction of outside technology or it could be due to natural, evolutionary development of tool technology. This could make or break the "migration from Europe" idea.

But, the BBC has fallen for the whole "17,000 year old Columbus" idea hook, line and sinker. (working with the Smithsonian Inst. etc...)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/columbustrans.shtml

I wanted to show a comparison between the Clovis points of North America and the spear heads of Europe from around 17,000 back to 20,000 ybp to show the similarities between the two technologies.

I can't find any good photos of European points on the Net... yet... but here's an article that shows the Neandertals... our literally "low-brow" friends... used stone spears to secure their dinners.

It was previously thought that they fed on previously killed animals... like road kill and other carnage... how demeaning.. and untrue.

Neandertal Hunters Get to the Point - excavation in Syria seems to indicate that Neandertals made use of stone spear points - Brief Article
Science News, July 3, 1999 by B. Bower


On the slope of a desert plateau in Syria, excavations have uncovered what seems to qualify as an archaeological smoking gun confirming the manufacture and use of spear points by Neandertals.

The evidence for this controversial proposition consists of an inch-long piece of a sharpened, triangular, stone point embedded in a neck bone of a wild ass, an extinct ancestor of donkeys. When intact, the point had extended an estimated 2 1/2 inches and was attached to a shaft or a handle, according to a scientific team led by Eric Boeda of the University of Paris X in Nanterre. As a Neandertal thrust the spear into the ancient creature's neck, both the point's tip and its base broke off, the researchers assert.

Initial measurements of radioactive decay in soil at the Syrian site yield an estimated age of more than 50,000 years for the new find. Stone points, ranging in size from less than 1 inch to several inches long, have turned up at many Neandertal sites located in Europe and the Middle East.

From: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_1_156/ai_55309018

Now let me post a link to a photo of a Clovis point for any viewers who may think we're completely off our rockers!

The Clovis era extends from about 11,500 years ago to about 10,800 years ago.

This is a nice collection from that era
(try to imagine hunting down a Sabertooth Tiger or Mega Bear for dinner with one of these at the end of a stick):

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/05/images/020722_clovis.jpg

What I find facsinating is that after the Clovis period, tool technology went down hill up until around 4000 years ago when Micro-Blades (ask about these if you like) and bi-faced points signify a resurgence in high, stone-age tool technology.

I've excavated everything from 13,000 years to 2000 year old sites as a founding member of an archaeological society and surveyer and professional excavator. The indicators are usually that the more primitive the tool, the older it was... but the Clovis points are the exception.

Ponderous indeed.

 

[Tojen]

Those Clovis spearheads are impressive, especially considering how they were made. They seem to have been made for big animals like mastodons, etc. Maybe there was no need for them once the megafauna were gone.

The idea that Neandertals were simply carrion eaters seems far-fetched to me. I can't imagine them surviving just on what they could find. It seems that would be a waste of their muscle power.

Two of the foundation blocks of the Europe-to-Americas theory are the absence of Clovis points or Clovis-like points in eastern Asia, and the European X lineage in some American Indians. Your first link mentions that Clovis points have recently been found in Asia, and now it seems the X lineage has been found in Asia:

Derenko et al. (2001) reported the presence of haplogroup X in Altaian populations from southern Siberia, where the other four Native American founding haplogroups (A, B, C and D) are also present. Therefore, the Altai are the only known modern ethnic group whose membership prepresents all five Native American haplogroups...
http://www.tracegenetics.com/Malhi and Smith 2002.pdf

This just points out that there isn't enough evidence yet. The quote at the end of http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_2_20/ai_53631758/pg_4" pretty much sums it up:

It seems to me that in archeology, when you lack direct evidence, whoever tells the best story wins. The best story is often the simplest, like the idea that the first Americans all came across the Bering land bridge 11,000 years ago, or the Native American claim that they've been here forever. The problem archeologists face now is that none of the new stories are simple. Until the dust settles, this question is going to be surrounded by chaos. --Karen Wright, freelance writer and editor