Who were the frist americans

[onlookerofmayhem]

8 hours ago, locomekipkachelfantje said:

I'd like to see a link to a site about thàt find...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X15000280

[Abramelin]

49 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X15000280

Thanks.

I assumed that the location was somewhere miles below sealevel. It's on the continental shelf of North America's Mid-Atlantic region.

[Nobu]

On 4/9/2022 at 4:57 AM, Poncho_Peanatus said:

I never seen anybody claiming to have been Plato Jesus or whatever. The ginormous wast majority claim to be a ordinary person.

I don’t know about the Plate guy but Jesus is one of my neighbors and really keeps his lawn well kept. You could do worse than be like Jesus.

[Swede]

Of potential interest. A draft, but relatively up to date for those who may be unfamiliar with aspects of the current research:

https://www.academia.edu/video/lBg80k?email_video_card=watch-video&pls=RVP

.

[Jon101]

Thanks so much for this Mr. Swede, Sir.

 

[Jon the frog]

On 3/4/2022 at 6:55 PM, jmccr8 said:

Hi Palmer

Hi Palmer

Just thought I would point out that if there were other groups that came  after that they would not be the first people to populate the Americas

Populate and going in America is two differrent things... maybe some early groups just didn't thrives at all and wither. 

Bigfoot was certainly there before ! 

Edited April 12, 2022 by Jon the frog

[Abramelin]

22 hours ago, Swede said:

Of potential interest. A draft, but relatively up to date for those who may be unfamiliar with aspects of the current research:

https://www.academia.edu/video/lBg80k?email_video_card=watch-video&pls=RVP

.

Can't watch it.

[Swede]

20 hours ago, Jon101 said:

Thanks so much for this Mr. Swede, Sir.

 

You are quite welcome. My pleasure.

.

[Swede]

2 hours ago, locomekipkachelfantje said:

Can't watch it.

Not sure how to respond. Apparently, other readers have had no problem accessing  the material. Jurisdictional differences?

.

[rashore]

1 hour ago, Swede said:

Not sure how to respond. Apparently, other readers have had no problem accessing  the material. Jurisdictional differences?

.

I couldn't watch it either. I got a few seconds in before it stopped with a pop-up... continue watching with a free account- sign up with Google, FB, or email. Won't let me watch it unless I sign up for an account there.

[LadyPhoenix]

Their title is a bit misleading.  The first Americans were the people who created a new nation here.  The first people on the continent, now, is a different matter.  Evidence shows that people were here far earlier than they could have arrived across the Bering land mass, and the Solutrean hypothesis is quite sound.  I've read Across Atlantic Ice, and watched many videos of one of the authors discussing the issue, and also studied many reports of older evidence and remains.  I don't believe there is any doubt that people came across from Europe, well before more came across the Bering land mass.  The story of the peopling of the Americas is far more complex than the standard theory we've all been taught. 

[LadyPhoenix]

On 3/4/2022 at 2:47 PM, C L Palmer said:

Honestly, ancient people got around a lot more then we give them credit for. Who is to say that there weren't other groups here that weren't supplanted by Siberian people coming through Bering? Who is to say that there weren't other groups after? Even the DNA we have seems to indicate different groups possibly related to folk from different parts of the globe, and that's not a comprehensive sample by any means. Nothing would surprise me as far as the peopling of any part of the world is concerned.

If archaeology is scientific, it can never become too attached to any theoretical framework. The minute the current theory outweighs new evidence, we have entered the realm of dogmatism. 

That's the joy and excitement behind science. When it is pure, you never know what might be discovered, or how that discovery might upend the way we see things. 

I'm certain that they did!  We wouldn't see actual bot remains, because they'd have been made from wood and skins, and wouldn't survive.  There is good evidence, though, that the Solutrean people encountered deep see fishes, and they didn't do that from the shore!  The DNA evidence that some claim is so settled rally isn't, and actually indicated European DNA, which the dogmatic ones want to pretend came from Europe to Asia then across the Pacific.  Ridiculous, of course, but that's what dogma does. 

Real science would be nice, wouldn't it?  I suspect we won't see much of that for this issue, though, because politics win out over common sense.

[LadyPhoenix]

On 3/7/2022 at 4:36 PM, Piney said:

Errrrrrrr.......No. Although there are whole NA genetic lineages that are extinct, they are known. We as a whole came from parts of Asia.

Of course when you have a member of the Quorum of 12 telling tribes that genetic testing of remains is sacrilege. Who is protecting their fictional dogma?

I guess you don't realize that DNA studies can't actually determine any location?  Scientists can guess, but that's what they're doing.  They cannot know, unless the people studied are modern or recorded in history as being from a specific place.  Any study of ancient DNA and origins is speculative.  Even the ancestry-type sites that offer testing will say this in the fine print. 

[Hanslune]

55 minutes ago, LadyPhoenix said:

Their title is a bit misleading.  The first Americans were the people who created a new nation here.  The first people on the continent, now, is a different matter.  Evidence shows that people were here far earlier than they could have arrived across the Bering land mass, and the Solutrean hypothesis is quite sound.  I've read Across Atlantic Ice, and watched many videos of one of the authors discussing the issue, and also studied many reports of older evidence and remains.  I don't believe there is any doubt that people came across from Europe, well before more came across the Bering land mass.  The story of the peopling of the Americas is far more complex than the standard theory we've all been taught. 

Is there actually a 'standard theory'? The one I learned long ago has been changed a great deal.

[Hanslune]

48 minutes ago, LadyPhoenix said:

I guess you don't realize that DNA studies can't actually determine any location?  Scientists can guess, but that's what they're doing.  They cannot know, unless the people studied are modern or recorded in history as being from a specific place.  Any study of ancient DNA and origins is speculative.  Even the ancestry-type sites that offer testing will say this in the fine print. 

Most theories concerning DNA and locations are well theories. I think that is well established. I think we can also dismiss theories that the Native Americas evolved or were created in the Americas.

[Abramelin]

3 hours ago, LadyPhoenix said:

I guess you don't realize that DNA studies can't actually determine any location?  Scientists can guess, but that's what they're doing.  They cannot know, unless the people studied are modern or recorded in history as being from a specific place.  Any study of ancient DNA and origins is speculative.  Even the ancestry-type sites that offer testing will say this in the fine print. 

In some cases the place of origin can be determined by certain trace minerals in bones. These minerals and their concentration are dependent on where you drank or ate what.

If I remember well, an example is the socalled "archer", whose skeleton was found near Stonehenge, proved to have come from Central Europe.

[Hyperionxvii]

It is unknown, they were always here. According to a documentary I once watched about a tribe who lives in Montana today. They had asked themselves this question. And of course, American paleoanthropologists came to help them find the answer, because that is the show. And they had told them that they found proof that your people have been in this land at least 12,000 years. Well, the tribe were not buying this stuff, white men speak with forked tongue it is known. And their own research told them the real answer 'We were always here'. Well, there you have it. 

Edited May 16, 2022 by Hyperionxvii

[jmccr8]

It has been brought forward in past about the Jomon culture in the Americas. this is one aspect of how things are.

ivescience.com/native-american-origin-theory-debunked

Native Americans may not have originated in Japan as previous archaeological evidence has suggested, according to a new study of ancient teeth. 

 

 

For years, archaeologists had predicted that the first people to live in North America descended directly from a group called the Jomon, who occupied ancient Japan about 15,000 years ago, the same time people arrived in North America around 15,000 years ago via the Bering Land Bridge, a strip of land that previously connected Russia to North America before sea levels rose above it. This theory is based on archaeological similarities in stone tools, especially projectile weapons, found in Native American and Jomon settlements.

 

 

However, the authors of the new study say this scenario is highly unlikely because the biological evidence "simply does not match up" with the archaeological findings, according to a statement from the researchers. 

Sponsored Links

 

 

The Most Beautiful Windmill In The Gardenacquter.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related: 10 things we learned about our human ancestors in 2020

RECOMMENDED VIDEOS FOR YOU...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 seconds of 4 minutes, 35 secondsVolume 0%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PLAY SOUND

 

 

 

"The Jomon were not directly ancestral to Native Americans," lead author G. Richard Scott, an anthropologist at the University of Nevada, Reno, told Live Science. "They [the Jomon] are more aligned with Southeast Asian and Pacific groups than with East Asian and Native American groups."

That is what is nice about science, it has the ability to discern factors

 

 

Instead, the researchers suspect that Native Americans descended from a different group living somewhere in East Asia, although a lot of uncertainty remains about exactly where and when those ancestors lived.

[Piney]

2 hours ago, Hyperionxvii said:

It is unknown, they were always here. According to a documentary I once watched about a tribe who lives in Montana today. They had asked themselves this question. And of course, American paleoanthropologists came to help them find the answer, because that is the show. And they had told them that they found proof that your people have been in this land at least 12,000 years. Well, the tribe were not buying this stuff, white men speak with forked tongue it is known. And their own research told them the real answer 'We were always here'. Well, there you have it. 

The "we were always here" crap has been going on since the eighties. The Navajo have been spouting it about their presence in the Southwest when they were late comers who split from the Athapaskan in the Alaskan region after a volcanic eruption.

On the same note the Dogrib and Yellowknife, who speak the same language say they were the ones who left the North.

AIM, which is now more of a religious cult also promotes we evolved here......but they also promote books and archeologists are bad and wrong.

 

 

[Nutrition Fact]

I was.