When I studied archaeology at WSU in the early 1990's the interior migration route was already in doubt. Clovis sites tend to get younger as they move from south to north, an interior migration should show the opposite, them getting younger as they move from north to south. Many other things in the archaeological evidence didn't support an interior migration either. A coastal migration was suspected, but at that time there was very little evidence to support it due to the rise in sea level.
Virginia Steen-McIntyre found artefacts which were dated (by three or four different laboratories!) at between 90,000 to 280,000 years ago, in Hueyatlaco in the Valsequillo Basin in Mexico. She was banished from the archaeological community in disgrace, yet nobody to date, as far as I know, has been able to prove the findings wrong. I doubt we'll ever find closure on this issue.
@@SenhorTudo one day I hope we will drop the non sense of people "migrating" or "entering" or "came to" the Western Hemisphere. Instead accept the probability man was here, in and of himself, here. From Patagonia up thru all of South America, mid America and North America. I'll even go so far as to say Man and his higher achievements had their Genesis in the West not the east. They base their model on lack of early human fossils and the lack of an ape in the west. They ignore what rapid melting of two ice sheets would do to terrain and anything on it or in it. The west was ground zero too many times for total obliteration's. The wild wild west if it were. The Amazon = the Pharmacia of the world, abundance of fresh water tributaries and rivers and lakes, vast grass lands, fertile soil and good climate all the way north into what's now the US. That breadbasket, fertile cradle of civilization they point to in N Africa and up into Anatolia, nah. Sand grows absolutely nothing and that Nile valley ain't a smidge of what the West had / has to offer. Someone needs to breathe new life into Mrs. Mcintyre's work, no? When you have time there are some rather recent video's here on UA-cam, look up megalithic walls, structures at Giant's playground in Montana, also at Sage Mtn Center in Montana. Big beautiful stones aligned in linear fashion matching what we see at the high altitudes of Puma Punku and around the earth but showing signs of damage and toppling. Exactly what you'd expect as the structures sat just south of the glacial edges of Laurentide & Cordileran prior to catastrophe. Thanks for sharing the information, I will research the woman's work and the findings.
@@BHeisler59 One factor that has been a source of much pondering on my part is the occurrence of beings that were regarded as "other" in so many legends around the world. In China we have the Dropa; The Hopi people speak of "ant people"; then there is the "nommo" of the Dogon people in Africa to mention but a few. In some cases they are elevated to the rank of "gods"; whereas in other cultures they were tutors who advanced the knowledge of the people with whom they interacted. These ancient people did not have the vocabularies to adequately relate what they were witnessing, so that their descriptions are garbled to us - and therefore not worthy of consideration to the "scientists". Who - or what - were these enigmatic beings? Could it be that they created the different races and influenced them according to their own individual philosophies? We're sitting on this planet looking out at the rest of the universe, sending probes into what we term "space" (vast distances to our puny minds, but actually not even an attometer in cosmic terms) like goldfish in a bowl on the mantelpiece, looking out at the comings and goings of these weird, gigantic creatures that feed us and clean our environment, having absolutely no clue as to what they are, what they are doing or anything about them. Our governments, their agencies and "educational facilities" waste unimaginable sums of money and millions of man hours competing for dominance, suppressing the masses and investigating things that have absolutely no value the people they are supposed to be serving and uplifting. My personal theory is that man is a venture by superior intellects into the viability of an organic form of A.I.: an experiment, if you will, but somewhere along the way it fell off the rails. Man is thus, in my opinion, a failed experiment and when I look at what mankind has become today, I am in despair that I am a member of this degenerate species.
This video is in need of an update. Footprints found in White Sands New Mexico date back 28,000 years. We defenitely mastered ocean travel. Polynesians have a high percentage of Desnisovan DNA. Aboriginel peoples are probably those who discovered the Americas after extending to Australia, as well.
@@tonkatoytruck , carbon dating of the seeds, pollen and quartz crystals left in the footprints at White Sands were between 21- 23,000 years ago. Camp materials from around The Dalles Oregon and Celilo Falls have been carbon dated back to 11,000 years ago, but archeologists think it's more like 14,000 years.
Also, the Cerutti Mastodon site in San Diego, California is an archaeological site that dates back 130,000 years and is considered the oldest in the Americas: The site includes the partial remains of a mastodon, along with five large stones that appear to have been used as hammers and anvils.
Can you imagine floating down the west coast, probably knowing you'd never see home again, no idea where you are going just surviving, probably surviving well but having no idea what's ahead. Absolutely amazing.
That’s the story of Genus Homo from Erectus to Sapiens. Curiosity. Hunger. “What’s over that hill or across this valley or plain? The hers look larger on the other side.” Start in Africa and one day we wake up and find their fossils in Java.
Nomadic people follow food. They don't worry about where home was yesterday or will be tomorrow. They only care if where they are today has food and is somewhat safe.
For real, I often contemplate that, they could just go 20...60...100 miles a day for a long time and never come across anyone. "Just Go That Way...there are no people" I think that forward looking experience explains some natives characters and world view to this day.
The first aboriginals arrived in Australia and the surrounding Islands almost 60,000 years ago, but the idea that Native Americans could not have possibly sailed to the Americas blatantly highlights the bias in mainstream archaeology. It's my guess that humans, and other hominid species were accomplished Sailors long before they left Africa.
@@Thekoryosmenstribepodcast What are you on about?? First of all, the Solutreans were Black. So they weren't, "European" What you think of as European didn't happen until much later, after the Yamnaya invaded the Neolithic farmers. Either way, that has nothing to do with my comment.
But the land bridge(s) from Asia to Australia would have been a lot more topographically significant; meaning island hopping. I don't think anyone thinks the endeavor resembled anything like the trek today would look like, nor that it would have been doable completely on foot.
We know the natives in Alaska built awesome skin boats so I've always wondered since back in thr ice age there were way bigger animals how big those skin boats could have gotten
Its the opposite of mindfullness, annoying loved ones late at night. Stupid loop repeats over 357 times. You should be sued for musical harassment multiplied by repeat count.
This was a really well presented video, a really significant amount of detail and information to support the central point in a very short amount of time. Thanks for the concise and succinct content!
The sea coasts contain easily obtained sources of food such as clams and kelp. The idea that early humans were up to slaying mastodons is far fetched. Also, boats are faster; locomotion by walking could not account for the massive population spread in 10,000 years or so.
@Sean T no, not impossible, but humans have always picked the lowest fruit from the tree. A clam or sea kelp never fought back. Even when they did isotope analysis on the Kennewick man, they found that he had mainly a marine mammal and shellfish diet. Hunting large megafauna like mammoths and mastodons would have been a dangerous and costly venture. Surely there would have been easier sources of food. The idea that they could have wiped out all the megafauna like mammoths, Cave Bears, and saber tooth tigers in just a few hundred years is ridiculous.
@@moemuggy4971 not that ridiculous , they were called hunters and gathers for a reason ,women gathered the men hunted , it wouldn't be far fetched for a group of 6-12 to prove their manliness but spearing a mammoth right in the heart , they could have even made a game of it , did they wipe them out ? No that was the ice age 10,000 years ago .
I think evidence for mastadon eating was interpreted as hunting and not just scavenging because they found stone points in mastadons who had survived and healed. Boats seem so obvious but anthropologists are academics. Some have learned flint knapping but none of them seem to understand how simple a seaworthy skin-on-frame boat can be to design and build. They understand that stone age people made tents, fished, and chopped wood but seem to have a hard time saying they had boats even when so much evidence makes it seem very likely.
Perhaps my favorite part about this stuff is imagining what it was like to be the first persons to enter a whole hemisphere. Just mile upon mile of no one but you. No trespassing on others’ land, no wars, no pressure, not even from other human branches. Plentiful resources-fish, game, water, wood. Fantastic in its freedom!
I dont believe they traveled over land. I find it hard to believe humans would travel through Siberia (even at its warmest 20,000 years ago is still frigid) and the Alaskan Yukon (see Siberia) and think that they would find a place to set up shop if they pushed a little bit longer. You know many died during that journey. They didnt have maps. So they followed Animals which probably got less and leas abundant as cold as it got? Now the Polynesians have been sea-faring for over 10,000 years as we know it. It isnt out of the realm of possibility that they also sailed 10,000 years even before that. So maybe those early people like the Polynesians were sea-faring as well. It would explain the dates mentioned in the video and it can finally put this preposterous idea that humans traveled over 3,000 miles in harsh extreme cold in hopes that maybe they might find a better place to hunt. Why are the Siberian and Yukon areas almost desolate and devoid of human life? Because it is beyond what our bodies can endure to survive. Tell me how again how and why they would make this ridiculous trek?
@@asecretturning Yup, people learned how to live in Siberia by 25 kya or earlier (e.g. Mal'ta people). They expanded to all of Siberia and went east and west to Europe and Americas.
Ya, most likely came from all different directions and from many different time periods as well.. we act like it’s almost impossible because we put our own shortcomings upon them, however I can pretty much guarantee you early man(woman) was much more capable and tougher than we are.
Ive been a coastman for the past few years because the evidence is overwhelming. Island hopping to visible islands likely has been done for a hundred thousand years and they boated across sections to australia for a known 40,000 years. Then with artifacts or footprints I am a strong believer if these rare spots are found you likely have to double it. The prints at white sands at 23,000 that makes it AT LEAST 30,000. The shoreline with its abundant food combined with doing forays to hunt animals plus inland cross ice sheets or corridors YOU WOULD BE EATEN. also the prevailing currents down the pacific shores are south. also the ice sheets people CAN AND DO walk along for miles and miles. not all ice sheets or pack ice are broken up glaciers and crevasses. The people lets say 50,000 years ago also people picture them like ape men but they were as intelligent as us if not more so. A thing to note is no relic in the americas has ever been found such as "crude tools by developing apes" such as in africa. Crude tools of course would be quickly made or simply used rocks to smash open bones but they are always found along with perfect points. The clovis spear points were masterpieces.
On contrary even before the prints were discovered they estimate it to be at least 30,000 years ago because the preserved young Alaskan girl that was frozen. The prints on the contrary make the them assume it's possible humans could've been here since the stone Age. As for the land bridge it was there for over the past 100,000 years with the ice age and disappeared around 30,000 years ago. On the contrary humans migrate out of Africa 60,000 years ago while tools are found in Australia 80,000 years ago. Meanwhile Neanderthals resided in Europe. In regards a site found in San Diego with tools suggest the humans were in North America dating back 130,000 years ago which people are really trying to deny. Unlike the clovis which were stone tools these tools were made of bone and they used bones to carve tools from more bones. Also that info came in 2017. A lot of new evidence being found recently. The Alaskan girl and the land bridge is fairly old evidence. I think it's fascinating though we're still discovering things modernly. Also I think why they would want to deny possible truths is it'd legitly state that Indigenous people were always in the Americas even through the 2 possible other hominid races we know that resided in Europe and Australia. Tbh I think it's a fair thought. I mean Australia as well humans would've crossed a gap of ocean as well though at one time New Zealand also had a much larger continent and it is practically under water now.
I'm throwing this out there, here is what I believe happened. There were three waves of closely related migrants into the Americas. The first came down the shoreline of the West Coast, island hopping from Asia along the Alaskan coast then south towards what is now California. At first, they did not go into the interior very far, finding all they needed along the coast and up rivers a short distance, their culture fully adapted to sea/river living. They kept going, and very quickly settled all the way to the Southern tip of South America. The second, and later migration, came over the land bridge and through the ice-free corridor between ice sheets. These people went south, but past the ice sheet they turned east and spread down the Mississippi and over to the Atlantic coast. They thrived until a comet hit the Canadian ice sheet over most likely Quebec, with the force of the blast being sent south over the Eastern part of the ice free Eastern North America, wiping out the vast majority, if not all, of the population. In time, members of the first migration moved east, and even northeast from South America, to fill the void in Eastern North America left by the comet strike. Then a wave of migration brought yet another closely related people from NE Asia which saw the Athabaskans and related peoples move east and south; Inuit peoples moving north and east. This is just what I have derived from seven decades of gathering information from eclectic sources.
@R Nedlo 2 Esdras 13:40 "Those are the ten tribes, which were caried away prisoners out of their own land, in the time of Osea the king, whom Salmanasar the king of Assyria lead away captive, and he carried them over the waters, and so came they into another land. But they took this council amongst themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt, That they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land.And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the River. For the most high then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. For through that country there was a great way to go; namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth. (America's)
@@rnedlo9909 In New Mexico they found Hebrew Artifacts that had the ten commandments, Truth is coming out and jesus is coming really soon. google "Los Lunas Decalogue Stone ". YOU have yet to PROVE anything commenting back and forth to me.
Flunk. Bering Island blocks the view to see Alaska and in bad weather you cant see it at all. I can not see Catalina Island from Long beach which is 29 miles and you can see Alaska from Siberia, Use critical thinking skills.
Ok now lets go back say 40,000 years. In the middle of an Ice Age a constant -25F no summer to speak of. That land bridge is a 100 foot thick sheet of ice. Devoid of food... walking through 3 feet of snow with nothing to eat!!! What do you think your rate of survival would be? None of the Inuit look alike groups moved south. The Mongolians, the Greenland Inuit, the Laplanders, the Siberian Steppe people!!!! thy are all still there. And, they are all very territorial. Food and supplies are extremely scarce in the Arctic. If you do not know how to survive in this area you die. Just like the early explorers who ventured into the Arctic. They starved to death or they froze. It is the same today as it was 40,000 years ago. Nobody in their right mind ventured into the Arctic without the knowledge of how to survive there. If anything, it was coastal foragers who followed the edge of the ice pack to North America. A peoples that know how to harvest Sea mammals and fishes. Knew that rendered whale fat made fire. I believe the Haida are some of those people.
What about the Meadowcroft site in New England? Dates go back to 35,000 years. Some First Nations on the BC coastal Islands have been separate populations for 25,000 years.
Many sites/remains have been dated well over 100,000 so even those numbers are off. These findings are always covered-up and suppressed. There are even findings beyond one million years; the problem is we do not dig down deep enough to get to the true beginning, if that's even possible.
Probably because it`s not convenient for the main stream of the scientific community. There were sites with findings dating over 25,000 in Brazil as well.
Danish researchers have proven the land corridor theory is impossible, for over a thousand years after it first opened the corridor was a uninhabitable frozen rock desert that stretched for over a thousand miles with almost no vegetation, any animals including humans that attempted the journey through the corridor would have starved throwing their dates even further out of the realm of possibility, not even including sites like Monte Verde also showing it was impossible.
@@nmarbletoe8210 Going to trust in those Danish scientists and the fact that sites like Monte Verde are simply too old to make the ice corridor theory possible. Its funny how people hold onto old theories for years after the facts simply do not line up anymore.
I live in Alaska. As I understand it, the first people to arrive here were the ancestors of the modern Aleuts and they came by sea starting about 25,000 years ago. The short face bear kept humans out on land until it went extinct about 12,000 years ago.
@@jacquesjanssen7361 They migrated from the islands off the Russian coast. Except that was long before it was Russian. The cave bear kept humans from migrating into North America for a long time. No bears on the islands.
The life style of Northern islanders in Chishima/Kuril were paleolithic one of seafarer nomad and could be a candidate people who had entered American new continent through kelp highway by boats.
The Smithsonian made an article awhile back basically saying that there is too much genetic, cultural, and linguistic diversity to be from one source population. They admitted racism influenced this too. The truth will come out
@@corneliusjohnson5963 they found a couple ships from greece and rome off of south america, as well as african stylized art such as stone carved heads in south america, also one of the oldest skulls found in south american was aferican. what im getting at is the winds blow off of africa and push to the americas (think of the hurricanes that hit the united states east coast). if boats were trapped in a storm they could easily get blown down there and survive as long as they had enough food, water, and could survive the ocean. that is a possibility, but on the other side of the americas
As for the Clovis points, there’s clearly earlier sites. Clovis was not first. Your solutrean hypothesis is now discounted by archaeologists. Genetics have shot this idea down. Perhaps the eastern half of the United States was friendlier to the fauna they were hunting. People did follow food...hence the hunter and gather idea.
Discounting the Solutrean Hypothesis is a bit premature. Sure, genetic code, none noted in current populations of the Americas. As with the Mega Fauna the hominids disappeared between the Pleistocene & Holocene in North America. In all likelihood due to multiple comet impacts across North America. Randal Carlton & Kosmographia delve deep into the fingerprints of Mass destruction during the Younger Dryas. Arctic Core Samples support this. Ocean Core Sample meltwater pulse 1a & 1b support this. No Clovis after the black mat layer. The people’s & mega fauna where all lost to cataclysm. New population spread across the Americas. Hence no genetic markers in today’s population
During the last iceage the so-called ice-free corridor was too cold for wildlife, very few habitation sites, the Upper Porcupine River an epic journey with no resources. Beringia wasn't separated until 12,000yrs ago, the recent 23ky-21ky old footprints at WhiteSandsNP point to an older timeline. The coast of Beringia was a desert, the central part graze for megafauna who migrated east-west to winter refugia with graze. The coast to a few miles inland was liveable, bear & forest survived north of Vancouver Is. and about 36ky a warming of 1200y-1400y occurred so my pick for early moves south with Holocene temps. Icy NWesterly trade winds flowed from Siberia kept the north shore vacant during a glacial max. The timing of Leakey's finds at Calico, CA, USA, is circa the previous interglacial, that is tantalizingly likely to be valid work with Peking Man in place long before. Fun stuff ☕️
What nonsense. South American Archaeologists have long said the first peoples came across to Chile directly from the Polynesian islands 50K years ago and longer. Trade winds, island hopping (oceans were 300-400ft lower then) and only 5000 miles, not the loopy notion of a 12 000mile roundabout marathon. DNA is also bearing it out.
@@gandalfs-pants Yep, Graham Hancock, America Before " the Key to Earth's Lost Civilisation " I have it on Audible but in any good bookstore also. Enjoy and free your mind.
just because a rock made by native americans vaguely looks like european knapping doesnt prove anything. same way mayan codexs and writing might resemble that of european/mesopatamian writing does not indicate that they were invented together coincidences arent serious evidence
But if we assume early humans moved by boat then how did all the early big game animals like elk move into North America? If the big animals moved across the bridge then it makes sense humans may have done the same. My guess is humans probably did both, some by boat and some by land.
The large animals were here since the the worlds land mass was all connected, pangea, as it was called. When the super continent broke up the animals were distributed across all the different parts that seperated.
There's been several glacial periods, the one talked about in this video is the latest. But such animals would've crossed millions of years before humans.
@@ottodidakt3069 The first ancestor of the nowdays Hominids originated 7 millions years ago, but, at this rate, the continent format were already separeted, almost identical with the today's world.
It's totally possible and has good evidence.i think the point of this hypothesis is that the sea travel explored further down the route, much sooner because it's faster
If migrants from Asia traveled to North America by boat and if Australian aborigines sailed to South America by boat why couldn't Europeans have sailed to North America by boat? From some place(s) in Europe to some place(s) in North America is a shorter distance than a sail from Australia to South America especially considering the Aborigines would also have no destination in mind.
I humbly think the answer will be a bit grey n fuzzy. We tend to forget that different groups were evolving quite separately in different areas and environments. I think it most likely there were a few different initial migrations from groups with different skillsets/specialties ... Island hopping boaties, land based nomadic game hunters etc. Discounting the water faring route does seem particularly disingenuous though, given the Australian and South Pacific colonisations
My personal issue with the Polynesian theory is that there aren't to my knowledge any archaeological sites in the Pacific islands that old (~20,000 BP). I personally think the first wave sailed down the Pacific coast, occasionally entering the interior via estuaries like the Columbia and San Francisco Bay, and later waves went inland.
Of course they went down the coast. There is a lot of easy food to be had along the rocks in the ocean. They could have walked it too in a few generations.
lol yeh easy food until you run into the Haida. They love it when people steal their food. Same as the Plains indians.. they never minded people crossing their land and stealing their food.
"Hey! lets take a long-ass hike over some of the roughest, coldest terrain in the world, so we can hunt huge critters that can easily stomp us! It will probably take weeks and months, and we'll probably only have a few hours of sunlight everyday. We'll go through an endless valley of glaciers that will be so beautiful! -said no one. ever.
Walking into the unknown for months with a family unit over glaciated mountains, then across a continental ice sheet is extremely unlikely. It would have been so much easier to make your way down the coast following the migrating birds and sea life. Even in primitive boats, there would have been much less risk, and more sustenance. I believe there were people in NA and then SA well over 20,000 years ago. There would have been a flood of people following 13K years ago, when the ice sheets finally melted.
In the middle of an ice age when half of North America is covered in glaciers, somehow there is this ice free corridor starting it northern Alaska stretching through Canada.
I figure they'd follow the food. Hunters from the interior would pursue migratory mammals while coastal fishermen and gatherers at low tide would gradually migrate down the coast.
There are traces in the genetic record of Europeans in the eastern North American Indigenous population. They sailed along the ice edge across The Atlantic Ocean to areas south of present New Jersey area.
The rock art is being dated to around 25,000 years ago, while a small number of eminent rock art specialists are proposing an even earlier date - perhaps as far back as 36,000 years ago.
The first American followed the big animals across the polar ice cap. That was their food. They may also have come by boat and probably did pursuing different food sources.
I can see how Alaska and Canada was inhabitted by siberian bering strait crossing. But central and south america from bering straight makes no sense at all . What would drive any human society to walk from Alaska to to Peru ? What can they find in the andes that they didnt find i now US , Mexico and so on !
@chapinrey : No one said that any one generation traveled all that way on foot (or otherwise even). It could have taken 100's or even 1.000's of years. You could travel that far in a 100 generations by simply moving less than 50 miles (or whatever it is mathematically) with each new generation. But the main *fact* is this: we will *never have all the facts.* Anyone who says more than that is simply making assumptions.
Radiocarbon dates in the range of 22,500 radiocarbon years (about 26,000 calibrated) were found in the area of the purported Ice Free Corridor - indicated glaciation followed that time, and that megafauna was present, and the area open for migration. The area was fully glaciated during the time of the commonly assumed Ice Free Corridor - indicating the only time it wasn’t open for travel was during the time that the classical hypothesis said it should have been open. The classical Ice Free Corridor is 180 degrees out of phase with the glacial record. The earlier non glacial interval was in synch with, and makes plausible, and overland route before the last (Late Wisconsinan) glaciation. (Young et al 1994, Young et al 1999).
Pales in comparison to the Solutreans, who travelled from Europe to the East coast of America 25,000 years ago. There are archeological sights in South Carolina and other states which prove this beyond doubt.
I just watched a great presentation by the Beringia Centre in the Yukon that examined Obsidian tools, such as micro blades and spear tips. The obsidian was obtained near the edge of the last glacial maximum. North west coast of Washington and Southern coast of British Columbia in Canada. They show that the migration through the two ice sheets in western Canada, actually goes from South to North. With the oldest dated tools towards the south. Totally supports the theory that the first people of North America arrived by sea and then started colonizing ice free areas.
Don’t know when this video was made, but it is outdated. There were different waves of peoples migrating to the Americas from Siberia of different cultures and periods. Genetics/DNA is writing a more accurate history. There is some evidence that South America was populated by some Australian/Melanesia peoples as some genetics/DNA analysis indicates. I believe that migration took different routes.
That same study argues that the austromelanesian mtdna occurred at some point in Asia, they believe that an extinct ancestral population mixed with the ancestors of native Americans and eventual with other austromelanesians. There’s also a study which believes the actual mixing took place more recently at around 11-13k bc.
There is actually research that indicates that pacific islanders originated out of what is British Columbia, landing first in Hawaii then spreading. Meanwhile other research indicates that the just before them other people migrated (in far less numbers), believe it or not but he DNA link is solid, from what was Persia into Europe then down the African west coast the into the Caribbean, then central and south America, over to Easter Island and landed in NZ a few hundred years before the Maori who descend from the other Pacific Islanders. The second migration cited is very controversial, not for scientific reasons, but because of the dominant dogma on the subject and the huge legal problem it poses for the Maori claims and their legal settlement with the NZ gov't. The Asia to Pacific Islands migration theory has been ruled out several times, one good reason is that when navigating by winds and currents as we suppose they did then it doesn't fit. It's actually way easier (including accidentally) to go from the SA west coast to Easter Island and back than from Asia to the islands. Human history as it was taught to us is cracking on all sides but It will probably take a few more decades to be revised, requiring more undebatable scientific data AND overcoming dogma inherited from the past 2 centuries. So the real story of human expansion is yet to be discovered, and it just may be way more complex than we thought !
If you were a hunter gatherer and you had a choice to live off of kelp and slow fat sea cows or 9 ton mastadons or 3 ton bison which would you choose? So yeah, obviously boats.
@@williamesselman3102 If you had a choice between running mammoths off of cliffs or freezing your ass off harvesting stinky kelp and bobbing up and down on a plank in a frozen dark deep scary wild ocean desperately trying to get around giant ice cliffs which would you choose so yeah obviously mocassins not saying your historically wrong, but the logic changes on the perspective
@@ottodidakt3069 I think that's a good point. But if my memory serves me correctly, they set off with a much different climate. If I'm remembering correctly, it was not cold, the sea lions were plentiful as well as the kelp. So in the beginning it would make sense to take the easy Road. But as the climate changed what they once had would be irrelevant because it would just be stories they told their children. Maybe my memory is slipping. It's been a year since I watched it.
Those coastal campsites do not have to march sequentially southward along the coast. That’s the way an amateur thinks. Separate groups would maybe stop at an established site, or just as likely (1) stop short of it, not knowing of its existence. Or, (2) press on to make more miles that day. In general, it would be appealing to expect their ages to decrease as you go southwards, but that could also be a bad assumption. There may well be large time gaps between groups, completely messing up neat theories. Better th first gather the evidence before theorizing about wha unfound evidence will be, let alone what it could mean. Courtesy of Half Vast Flying
Worth noting: archeologists now believe paleolithic Asians were seafaring well within the earliest windows of time when people could have jumped from Beringia to coastal north America: evidence points to paleolithic arrival by sea to the Ryuku islands approx. 35k-30k bp.
@@donaldclifford5763 I am not denying the existence of Beringia (much more than just a land bridge). The issue is not “how did people get from Siberia to Alaska?”. The issue is “How did people get from Alaska to the rest of the Americas?” There was an enormous ice sheet covering all of Canada, all the way to the Pacific Ocean. There was no way for people to walk from Beringia to the Americas until the ice free corridor opened up, but it is very probable that people were in the Americas long before the ice free corridor opened up, or so it seems with today’s evidence. So, coastal navigation from Beringia down the Pacific coast seems to be the best hypothesis.
went to a Parks Canada lecture in Victoria, BC about an excavation between the high and low tide lines in BC's Queen Charlottes', now Haida G., and you can''t IMAGINE the difficulty, not even counting the BUGS all day. Coming down the coast the boats would be far, far out and the islands were grasslands, home of large bear NOT black bear or cedar and sitka stands today.
The one went to Cali not the ones in ky I believe they still remember languages some from beringia And more native American and me half and half European
you cant carbon date stone, only organic matter. They probably found the stone buried deeper than some wood or plant fibres, and carbon dated those to put the stone in context
Another site in Boulder Colorado had items radio carbon dated at 18,000 plus years. In from the coast or down the chute from inland Canada. Nice job prehistoric people!
If people from Taiwan and Southeast Asia (the Austronesian ppls) managed to colonize and leave their descendants on islands spreaded as far apart from Madagascar to Easter island, Hawaii and New Zealand, then it's safe to say that they could be another missing link in the peopling of the Americas. Its been proven that there has been intermingling with the Polynesians and native Americans via the botanical exchange of sweet potatoes and chickens, as well as DNA evidence in the islands closest to the Americas, namely the Marquesas and easter islands.
In a boat, you can access the most productive environment on earth, the intertidal. You can also carry all your gear, easily. On land, every ounce has to be carried on your back. And the boats allow access ro marine hunting.
Im a fim believer of the bering strait land bridge theory. but when. who knows. Im apache and if your navajo. you cant deny the resmblance to asians. yes over time the land shaped us. but I mean cmon. at some point in time people came from africa, split off and then eventually came to americas. who knows they coulda walked all the way to chili and brazil.
Andrew Essence why are there pyramids and and in Central America. Why does almost every tribe in America have a flood story. Why do native Americans have a story of a white savior creator who came and said he would come back in the future. How did sweet potatoes get to the Polynesian islands.
There is very little evidence of Asian influence in Native American culture. I think there may have been a few Asians that made it over. For sure no Africans. But for the most part I’m pretty sure the native population is mostly Jews. It all makes sense.
@@drewdown826 DNA evidence suggests migration across the Pacific directly from the Polynesian land mass (50K years ago the oceans were 300-400ft lower) by way of island hopping to Chile. That was one migration. The Bering movement also happened. Still others came across the Atlantic (Solutreans) from southern Spain and France areas approx 16-20K years ago.This is why the Native American Haplogroups are so mixed. Plenty of solid evidence but politically driven narratives in North America are threatened by it.
@@navajokimball7573 Not Jews - Atlanteans. Jews never built pyramids and are predated by Phoenicians who were definitely on the east coast in 2000BC. Tablets and writings have been found. Long before the Phoenicians, there were the Caucasians who's perfectly preserved mummies were found in the Windover bog in Florida and gene testing revealed European Caucasians 7000yrs ago.
And data-backed fact, actually. North American academics don't like that inconvenient truth, however, as it collides with their politically motivated narrative.
siriusisastar considering that not all scientists are American, or white... that’s just a silly claim. Genetics can trace human migrations. Guess what, they show a bottleneck effect. Which does seem to support Beringia as a crossing point. Considering eastern Polynesia wasn’t settled until later, I don’t think Polynesia is the source of native Americans.
Traveling by water is much more economical and likely they had fish as part of their diet. This makes more sense than wandering into a strange land with unknown dangers by foot. The distribution of human habitation of Pacific Islands further makes this credible.
This is such BS! If the original Americans came across the Bering Strait, why is it that the people in N. and S. Americas don't appear to have a little Asian phenotype? What about the Black Aboriginal that were already here??
What ever happen to the sites i learned about in college, one along a lake in texas and the other in pantigonia that were dated to 40,000 years ago from national geographic.
Isn't Columbus day like Christmas by now? Harmless in it's innocence at this point I'd say, because there are probably only as many people who believe Columbus discovered America as there are people who believe Santa Claus brings them presents every December the 25th, lols. Let them believe if that helps them feel like a kid again. ^-^
Aylbdr Madison Well Santa Claus is harmless fun really hurts no one. Telling children that Columbus discovered America and had dinner with the pilgrims and “Indians” is going to inevitably lead to other harmful misinformation which hurts indigenous people.
Do not forget that the Ice Sheets and kinds of animals that allowed peoples like the Inuit to exist on them extended deeper into and across the Atlantic Ocean. While hard to prove but research is being done in that area as well. There may have been more than one path to migration.
A search engine is quite helpful when you don't know something. Just a thought from someone who grew up in a time when you would have to walk to the library instead.
Obsidian, will absorb water at a very slow but measurable rate. Once a projectile point has been knapped out of of a larger stone, or it has been broken exposing fresh material on the inside, it is then free to start absorbing water from the environment, starting the timer so to speak. The "rind" or depth of water saturation can be examined giving a means to make an estimation on age.
I recall anthropologists pointing out that in prehistoric Europe the seaways were principal paths of migration rather than barriers. Why not in North America? Aren't the oldest human remains in the Americas from islands off the coast of California?
The Pacific Islanders could travel across vast ocean distances to settle such remote places as Hawai’i and Rapa Nui, and the Northern peoples such as Inuit/Alaskan Natives can thrive in the Arctic. The peoples settling the Western Hemisphere would find traveling down the coast knowing there’s a continent on one side would not be an insurmountable challenge.
I don't know what appeal this "romantic delusion" involving watercraft has but its persistence is astonishing. A review of the temperatures in the North Pacific/Aleutians shows it to be a very cold place and one of the last areas settled by human beings. The DNA science ties Native Americans to Siberians near the southern area around Lake Baikal, and I wish people would shed their two-dimensional thinking and look at an actual world globe.
Except that the Berengia land bridge existed during the era when humans were migrating from Siberia to North America. Now let me repeat what I said about temperatures in that part of the world. The Eskimos/Aleuts were latecomers, on the order of 6-10 thousand years afterwards. But thanks for proving my point about the appeal of that "romantic delusion."
Well, yes, but the "ice free corridor" may not have even existed at that time, and people travelling such a route would not leave artifacts along the coast. On the other hand, people who lived along Lake Baikal might easily have developed water transportation skills, and used them to skirt the land bridge while fishing or pursuing marine mammals. If anything qualifies as a "romantic delusion," it would be bands of hearty hunters bravely chasing megafauna across the land bridge and deep into a new continent.
As over 80% of the current human population live within a few miles of water, that waterlogged boats have been found in inland bogs in Europe dating to 14k years ago your opposition to the idea that the easiest method for such rapid expansion was by water seems deliberately obtuse - how do you think aborigines got to fucking Australia 50,000 years ago? Were they able to walk on water back then? As sea levels have risen post ice age much of the coast they would have stopped and possibly formed settlements on are now under water - the island chains in the North Sea in Europe were connected by boat 40k years ago, we are only just finding the data as it is now 60 metres BELOW the current surface. If people were using boats in Northern Europe and Australia at around the same time, the tech was wide spread, the idea that nomads followed Mammoths, cos that was the ONLY thing they hunted is farcical, how often could they take down prey of that size do you think? Able to do that regularly but NOT build boats? As for ou idiotic temperature argument, what the fuck do you think the Inuit do when it gets chilly? Walk every where? Grow a fucking brain you half wit
@ @@Cheeseatingjunlista #remedial schoolteacher voice on Posters like you make me wish there were minimum mandatory requirements to operate a computer and a "driver's license" required on the "Information Superhighway." Of course that's obvious to anyone looking at your convoluted grammar, syntax, and spelling. But let's have a "geology class," and perhaps by the time I'm finishing skewering, you'll at least have learned the difference between profanity and profundity and learn it's not polite to be a potty mouth. Item: How did the first Australians arrive on that continent? Answer: They walked. www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/science/aboriginal-australians-dna-origins-australia.html >>All living Aboriginal Australians descend from a single founding population that arrived about 50,000 years ago, the study shows. They swept around the continent, along the coasts, in a matter of centuries. And yet, for tens of thousands of years after, those populations remained isolated, rarely mixing. >>Fifty thousand years ago, sea levels were so low that Australia and New Guinea formed a single continent. Humans moved from Southeast Asia onto this landmass, some settling in what is now New Guinea, others traveling farther south into Australia. Sorry, Einstupid, no boats... Here's another summary of the same facts: www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worlds-oldest-civilization >>Around 50,000 years ago, the wave of migration reached Sahul, a prehistoric supercontinent composed of present-day Australia, Tasmania and New Guinea prior to their separation by rising sea levels 10,000 years ago. At that time, according to the study’s authors, Aboriginal Australians became genetically isolated, making it the world’s oldest civilization. And seriously this scientist, Eske Willerslev, is probably my favorite molecular biologist out of a number of them, all really sharp. He's the individual who sequenced the DNA of Kennewick Man, incidentally, and by identifying that individual's mitochondrial haplogroup as X2a, made another "boat champion" (Dennis Stanford) look really foolish. >>“It’s a really weird scenario,” said evolutionary geneticist Eske Willerslev, a lead author of the study and a professor at the Center for GeoGenetics at the University of Copenhagen. “A few immigrants appear in different villages and communities around Australia. They change the way people speak and think; then they disappear, like ghosts. And people just carry on living in isolation the same way they always have. This may have happened for religious or cultural reasons that we can only speculate about. But in genetic terms, we have never seen anything like it before.” Eske was speaking about how the language of Aussie Aboriginals is really "young" (4,000 years) in comparison with the DNA evidence and the landmass that permitted an ancient migration to Australia.
@@randywright9571 Way to strawman, chief. Kudos for nitpicking the minor point of whether or not Australians arrived by sea, while completely ignoring the point at issue, of whether its *possible* that Humans had 'boats' 15000 years ago. But lets not dwell on that and look at the larger fallacy of identifying a people, by their technology; in the case of Clovis, by a feature added-on to otherwise typical stone tools. Its always been a problem, resolving the rapidity of Clovis spread down the continent. However, if we look at it not as a spread of populations, but a dissemination of a specific innovation, throughout an established population? Then theres also the assumption that samples are nominally representative and not the 'Cadillac' model. Its highly likely that the characteristic fluting of Clovis points(a feature many expert knappers struggle with), is an option and that most of their tools were more conventional(as many such 'common' tools have been found alongside characteristic 'Clovis'). This creates a number of problems with using a flake removal on an otherwise unremarkable point, to track the spread of a group. We can look at this feature on different artifacts and say that its the same technology, but we cannot say who made it, or if it was an independent discovery(as we are seeing more and more of, in the prehistoric). Its entirely possible that migration took place much sooner than thought(and possibly from multiple points) and the Americas were already actively populated at the time the Clovis Innovation occurred. The overarching point being that numerous documented sites blow away Canadian Corridor dogma, by thousands of years. Sooo... apparently, someone is wrong.
also i must point out. that the white sands desert is in the middle of the western hemisphere. They didn't fall out of the sky and land in the desert like they were playing C.O.D.
@@annoyed707 where was that? i know historically their was a time when their was no moon, a long period of time spread through oral tradition. But i didn't notice nothing about day and night before the lights where placed especially in the bible. I wouldn't mind seeing what you talking about though. But if its the fact that the first stanzas before it mentions creations its because the first 3 parts of genesis are events that came after but placed before as title and descriptors based on the hebrew marks. However about our people being here from boat long before anyone else their are historians have had the records for along time now of the journey it took to come here so some of us most certainly came by boat. And the proof was already in the spanish records which is they started campaigning to get all spanish documents dismissed as lies. they also have records that a trade route in peru that stretched through most of south america and up towards the north was called Amarukha, and the people that build it and controlled those area's where a tribe of people that where called the Amaru Khans. Interesting anyway and also factual theirs alot of english records that don't match any other of the records and leave alot of things out.. compared to the other nations which scholars tend to ignore i'm sure to keep their publications relevant as they did with clovis first and many other scientific findings which unfortunately why science wise we have been stuck. Which is not what science was meant to be. but it is what it is.
@@draco_1876 Which is why almost everything is based on it? and why all the history lines up? i don't think you know what you are talking about nor have ever read it.
Discussing about Hokkaido route, Ainu aren't indigenous or aborigine at all. They came in 12th century and no relation with First Americans theme completely. They are quite different from Australian Aborigine and American native Indians' situation. Related people for the First Americans are Proto-Japanese Hokkaido（PJH, Hokkaido Sojin）had lived there, northern part of Japanese archipelago, since 35-30,000 years ago though their bones haven' t been found yet. Similar peoples' bones were found in Okinawa, as samples of 36,000~27,000 years ago. On the other hand, their ancestors are famous for crossing sea more than 20km to collect obsidians at Onbase island in Tokyo islands since 38,000 years ago. Any way, it's not Ainu, but Proto-Japanese Hokkaido（PJH）or Hokkaido Sojin as the ancestral candidate people of the First Americans. These're well known matter about Ainu and ancestors, but really very strange of no mentioning from university scholars' side.
its also worth noting that during the ice age, there was a lot more coastline and land to live on than their is today. so a lot of archaeological evidence is very likely underwater. for example, New Jersey at one point extended MUCH further out to sea than it does today, so a lot of evidence is very likely underwater or washed away. the west coast is a bit different due to the continental shelf but in some places this still holds true.
Sailed to Cortez island and the others next to it in the 90'. Moonlike but found many sea lions teeth. Going south it was a good introduction to the than more than amazing Baha California and later sea of cortez. Breathtaking all the way above and below the water. And good it never got into USA hands. I did after much research found that even the ones that arrived by boat had mostly never arrived but vanished at sea. There was no maps of where islands were, though starmaps were slowly collected with sticks and sinue. That was possible without much if any travel at first as the sky did the travelling. Collecting information about land even islands one had to move to explore and discover. so many starved to death or drowned because boats could not travel very far due to very simple not long-lasting mast and sail as well as hull quality. Boats often fell appart before reaching a new island. Little room for water or food on these vessels back than. Sails and lines often only lasted a few days to weeks at the most. But really it is very complex and would take a book or two to cover. Travelers by land lived much like animals did. They did not set out to travel as we now know many thousands of miles by foot but stayed for really long periods of time as long as food was found. Moved on when food was not found or driven by harsh weather. Humans followed the animals. Little was understood about longitudinal or latitude travel. Not much understanding of North and South. Actually similar as today since many people still do not understand that it does not necessarily get warmer travelling south. Especially standing near the equator.
I'm curious about the walrus hunting Inuit and Nunavut related cultures who were moving around Greenland and Svalbard before 100BC. Do they count as discovering americas if they migrated from the east but not if they arrived by coming from the west, through alaska?
one areA that archaeology fails is they cant interpolate because of course "everything needs to be proven with evidence". so they find the footprints in white sands at 23,000 and they do have the mental ability to realize "therefore it had to be MUCH sooner since we found these tracks of what had to be tens of thousands already here for a long time" its not within them--they cant do it. so a machinist like me says "those prints documented at 23,000 means AT LEAST 30,000 because of whats not been found or washed away" NOPE WE CANT HAVE THAT ITS AGAINST THE SCIENTIFIC WAY!! these footprints are 23,000 therefore THEY WERE FIRST ARRIVERS AND HIKED DOWN FROM ALASKA A COUPLE YEARS EARLIER.
Ancient man was nowhere near the top of the food chain: apart from very limited numbers, predators included sabre-tooth tigers, American lions, dire wolves and short-faced bears.
What I would LOVE to see is a well financed research into just how people from 15000 years ago could build boats sea worthy enough to handle coastal waters. I'd love to see work on this and maybe some full sized prototypes -- and maybe an attempt at recreating such a crossing. A group of seamen of that era would likely have the knowledge of boat handling and weather, though not with weather forecasting like we have now. I think it likely that some but probably not all of the immigrants, the first immigrants, travelled by sea. One would surmise either a hopscotch approach where a group migrates a distance, sets up a foothold camp, and then more join before some of them take the coast further east and south. We don't give 'us' enough credit for what we were able to do 15,000 years ago.
Skin covered boats are full seaworthy. Native Alaskan and Arctic tribes hunt seals and small whales on the open ocean. Building them is a "vernacular" (informal) skill that's been refined over many thousands of years.
@@anim8torfiddler871 Yes, that makes sense, but we're not talking about a handful of people and the distance is large. Yes, there were no doubt waypoints along the Aleutian Chain they could stay for days/weeks/years but ultimately many/most appear to have either returned westward or continued east then southerly. What would be the practical limit as to how big the boats could have been? How many people could it carry and what was the propulsion. Surely rowing would have been one method that's particularly needed when there's no wind, but surely also they had at least rudimentary sailing abilities with basic sheets for sales. Sheets probably made of skin -- not likely they had a nearby textile mill and hand weaving, though almost certainly within their bag of tricks, might be harder to fashion going back, say 20,000 years or earlier.
Read about Kon Tiki from the 1940's. They build a raft using old techniques and sailed over 4,000 miles. But why suspect humans didn't develop more sophisticated ships? The human brain hasn't advanced much in 200,000 years. Sure the average human wouldn't figure it out, but what about an Elon Musk type from 20,000 years ago? The first airplane to jet happened in less than 1 lifetime. The biblical ark story is over 3,000 years old. And who's to say we won't start a nuclear war and loose all current knowledge within another decade and go back to prehistoric times? Humans are not only capable of incredible intelligence we are capable of incredible stupidity.
It’s extremely important to remember that during the height of the ice age, sea levels were 400 feet lower! Exposing large amounts of continental shelf! You could walk to Great Britain, there was no Mediterranean Sea! Black Sea! Were we really need to explore is the shelf’s! Especially where rivers entered the ocean! I’m certain that there’s tons of evidence under water! If it survived.
came by boats? isn't that what you said was preposterous about the Solutrian theory??? It means people could have come from anywhere by boat. Easter island isn't that far from South America, when was it first peopled?
I'm watching Jim Dixon videos; he respects the Solutrian idea as a possibility. It's a coastal route! On the other hand, Easter Island is a bazillion light years from South America.
When I studied archaeology at WSU in the early 1990's the interior migration route was already in doubt. Clovis sites tend to get younger as they move from south to north, an interior migration should show the opposite, them getting younger as they move from north to south. Many other things in the archaeological evidence didn't support an interior migration either. A coastal migration was suspected, but at that time there was very little evidence to support it due to the rise in sea level.
Virginia Steen-McIntyre found artefacts which were dated (by three or four different laboratories!) at between 90,000 to 280,000 years ago, in Hueyatlaco in the Valsequillo Basin in Mexico.
She was banished from the archaeological community in disgrace, yet nobody to date, as far as I know, has been able to prove the findings wrong. I doubt we'll ever find closure on this issue.
@@SenhorTudo one day I hope we will drop the non sense of people "migrating" or "entering" or "came to" the Western Hemisphere. Instead accept the probability man was here, in and of himself, here. From Patagonia up thru all of South America, mid America and North America. I'll even go so far as to say Man and his higher achievements had their Genesis in the West not the east. They base their model on lack of early human fossils and the lack of an ape in the west. They ignore what rapid melting of two ice sheets would do to terrain and anything on it or in it. The west was ground zero too many times for total obliteration's. The wild wild west if it were. The Amazon = the Pharmacia of the world, abundance of fresh water tributaries and rivers and lakes, vast grass lands, fertile soil and good climate all the way north into what's now the US. That breadbasket, fertile cradle of civilization they point to in N Africa and up into Anatolia, nah. Sand grows absolutely nothing and that Nile valley ain't a smidge of what the West had / has to offer. Someone needs to breathe new life into Mrs. Mcintyre's work, no? When you have time there are some rather recent video's here on UA-cam, look up megalithic walls, structures at Giant's playground in Montana, also at Sage Mtn Center in Montana. Big beautiful stones aligned in linear fashion matching what we see at the high altitudes of Puma Punku and around the earth but showing signs of damage and toppling. Exactly what you'd expect as the structures sat just south of the glacial edges of Laurentide & Cordileran prior to catastrophe. Thanks for sharing the information, I will research the woman's work and the findings.
@@BHeisler59 One factor that has been a source of much pondering on my part is the occurrence of beings that were regarded as "other" in so many legends around the world. In China we have the Dropa; The Hopi people speak of "ant people"; then there is the "nommo" of the Dogon people in Africa to mention but a few. In some cases they are elevated to the rank of "gods"; whereas in other cultures they were tutors who advanced the knowledge of the people with whom they interacted. These ancient people did not have the vocabularies to adequately relate what they were witnessing, so that their descriptions are garbled to us - and therefore not worthy of consideration to the "scientists".
Who - or what - were these enigmatic beings? Could it be that they created the different races and influenced them according to their own individual philosophies?
We're sitting on this planet looking out at the rest of the universe, sending probes into what we term "space" (vast distances to our puny minds, but actually not even an attometer in cosmic terms) like goldfish in a bowl on the mantelpiece, looking out at the comings and goings of these weird, gigantic creatures that feed us and clean our environment, having absolutely no clue as to what they are, what they are doing or anything about them.
Our governments, their agencies and "educational facilities" waste unimaginable sums of money and millions of man hours competing for dominance, suppressing the masses and investigating things that have absolutely no value the people they are supposed to be serving and uplifting.
My personal theory is that man is a venture by superior intellects into the viability of an organic form of A.I.: an experiment, if you will, but somewhere along the way it fell off the rails. Man is thus, in my opinion, a failed experiment and when I look at what mankind has become today, I am in despair that I am a member of this degenerate species.
@@SenhorTudo lol
@@SenhorTudo Really? Wow such a discovery? I can't believe she was banished.
This video is in need of an update. Footprints found in White Sands New Mexico date back 28,000 years. We defenitely mastered ocean travel. Polynesians have a high percentage of Desnisovan DNA. Aboriginel peoples are probably those who discovered the Americas after extending to Australia, as well.
I also believe that around Haida Gwaii they’ve found evidence of settlement in fairly flat areas that are under ocean water today.
@@tonkatoytruck , carbon dating of the seeds, pollen and quartz crystals left in the footprints at White Sands were between 21- 23,000 years ago. Camp materials from around The Dalles Oregon and Celilo Falls have been carbon dated back to 11,000 years ago, but archeologists think it's more like 14,000 years.
Yeeeeeeep! 1,000% correct!
The human artifacts excavated at Monte Verde in Chile were reliably dated to 30,000 BP., not 14, 500.
Also, the Cerutti Mastodon site in San Diego, California is an archaeological site that dates back 130,000 years and is considered the oldest in the Americas:
The site includes the partial remains of a mastodon, along with five large stones that appear to have been used as hammers and anvils.
Can you imagine floating down the west coast, probably knowing you'd never see home again, no idea where you are going just surviving, probably surviving well but having no idea what's ahead. Absolutely amazing.
One could say that hunter gatherers had no home, which primed them for such adventures.
What was ahead was probably not going to very much different than what was behind them based on their experiences.
That’s the story of Genus Homo from Erectus to Sapiens. Curiosity. Hunger. “What’s over that hill or across this valley or plain? The hers look larger on the other side.” Start in Africa and one day we wake up and find their fossils in Java.
Nomadic people follow food. They don't worry about where home was yesterday or will be tomorrow. They only care if where they are today has food and is somewhat safe.
For real, I often contemplate that, they could just go 20...60...100 miles a day for a long time and never come across anyone. "Just Go That Way...there are no people"
I think that forward looking experience explains some natives characters and world view to this day.
The first aboriginals arrived in Australia and the surrounding Islands almost 60,000 years ago, but the idea that Native Americans could not have possibly sailed to the Americas blatantly highlights the bias in mainstream archaeology. It's my guess that humans, and other hominid species were accomplished Sailors long before they left Africa.
Europeans got here 33,000 years ago. Does anyone talk about it? NOPE. They were called the Solutreans.
@@Thekoryosmenstribepodcast What are you on about??
First of all, the Solutreans were Black. So they weren't, "European"
What you think of as European didn't happen until much later, after the Yamnaya invaded the Neolithic farmers.
Either way, that has nothing to do with my comment.
1 tribe in the Amazon that stood out from their neighbors was discovered to actually have Australian Aboriginal DNA. Freaking cool
But the land bridge(s) from Asia to Australia would have been a lot more topographically significant; meaning island hopping. I don't think anyone thinks the endeavor resembled anything like the trek today would look like, nor that it would have been doable completely on foot.
We know the natives in Alaska built awesome skin boats so I've always wondered since back in thr ice age there were way bigger animals how big those skin boats could have gotten
Irritating music plays right over the speaker. Who does that?
Most....its kinda like dei....
Its the opposite of mindfullness, annoying loved ones late at night. Stupid loop repeats over 357 times. You should be sued for musical harassment multiplied by repeat count.
The same people that are negative about free content. Did you know you can mute this and open closed captions?
@@debbylou5729 People prefer a nice clear Human voice...
@@will7its what is dei?
This was a really well presented video, a really significant amount of detail and information to support the central point in a very short amount of time. Thanks for the concise and succinct content!
The sea coasts contain easily obtained sources of food such as clams and kelp. The idea that early humans were up to slaying mastodons is far fetched. Also, boats are faster; locomotion by walking could not account for the massive population spread in 10,000 years or so.
@Sean T no, not impossible, but humans have always picked the lowest fruit from the tree. A clam or sea kelp never fought back. Even when they did isotope analysis on the Kennewick man, they found that he had mainly a marine mammal and shellfish diet. Hunting large megafauna like mammoths and mastodons would have been a dangerous and costly venture. Surely there would have been easier sources of food. The idea that they could have wiped out all the megafauna like mammoths, Cave Bears, and saber tooth tigers in just a few hundred years is ridiculous.
you are one of a few.
Also cannot account for the linguistic and cultural diversity on the western sides of both continents
@@moemuggy4971 not that ridiculous , they were called hunters and gathers for a reason ,women gathered the men hunted , it wouldn't be far fetched for a group of 6-12 to prove their manliness but spearing a mammoth right in the heart , they could have even made a game of it , did they wipe them out ? No that was the ice age 10,000 years ago .
I think evidence for mastadon eating was interpreted as hunting and not just scavenging because they found stone points in mastadons who had survived and healed.
Boats seem so obvious but anthropologists are academics. Some have learned flint knapping but none of them seem to understand how simple a seaworthy skin-on-frame boat can be to design and build. They understand that stone age people made tents, fished, and chopped wood but seem to have a hard time saying they had boats even when so much evidence makes it seem very likely.
Perhaps my favorite part about this stuff is imagining what it was like to be the first persons to enter a whole hemisphere. Just mile upon mile of no one but you. No trespassing on others’ land, no wars, no pressure, not even from other human branches. Plentiful resources-fish, game, water, wood. Fantastic in its freedom!
@@privatename123 cue the megafauna…
I'd call dibs.
They didn't care that they were the first or not. They just followed the food and instinct to survive.
@@teddybear-g4k what an interesting perspective. You think that curiosity and wonder are a new development? Even octopuses have curiosity…
Hi i need to watch this for school who’s with me?
I dont believe they traveled over land. I find it hard to believe humans would travel through Siberia (even at its warmest 20,000 years ago is still frigid) and the Alaskan Yukon (see Siberia) and think that they would find a place to set up shop if they pushed a little bit longer. You know many died during that journey. They didnt have maps. So they followed Animals which probably got less and leas abundant as cold as it got?
Now the Polynesians have been sea-faring for over 10,000 years as we know it. It isnt out of the realm of possibility that they also sailed 10,000 years even before that. So maybe those early people like the Polynesians were sea-faring as well. It would explain the dates mentioned in the video and it can finally put this preposterous idea that humans traveled over 3,000 miles in harsh extreme cold in hopes that maybe they might find a better place to hunt. Why are the Siberian and Yukon areas almost desolate and devoid of human life? Because it is beyond what our bodies can endure to survive. Tell me how again how and why they would make this ridiculous trek?
They did, it just wasn't the only thing. Try asking your questions toward sources instead of youtube comments.
wonder how the people who reached mexico 250,000 years ago got there
@@21LAZgoo boat
@@asecretturning Yup, people learned how to live in Siberia by 25 kya or earlier (e.g. Mal'ta people). They expanded to all of Siberia and went east and west to Europe and Americas.
How do we know it wasn’t by land and sea? Groups could have split up to explore and expand upon each route!
You take the high road and I'll take the low road?
Travelling by water would be so much easier than waiting for the continental ice sheets to melt.
Bingo...leap frogging
Archeologists.. the last to figure out the obvious...like Fauci and covid 19...the Bill Gates Pandemic!
Ya, most likely came from all different directions and from many different time periods as well.. we act like it’s almost impossible because we put our own shortcomings upon them, however I can pretty much guarantee you early man(woman) was much more capable and tougher than we are.
There is solid proof that they came by helicopter.
Ive been a coastman for the past few years because the evidence is overwhelming. Island hopping to visible islands likely has been done for a hundred thousand years and they boated across sections to australia for a known 40,000 years. Then with artifacts or footprints I am a strong believer if these rare spots are found you likely have to double it. The prints at white sands at 23,000 that makes it AT LEAST 30,000. The shoreline with its abundant food combined with doing forays to hunt animals plus inland cross ice sheets or corridors YOU WOULD BE EATEN. also the prevailing currents down the pacific shores are south. also the ice sheets people CAN AND DO walk along for miles and miles. not all ice sheets or pack ice are broken up glaciers and crevasses. The people lets say 50,000 years ago also people picture them like ape men but they were as intelligent as us if not more so. A thing to note is no relic in the americas has ever been found such as "crude tools by developing apes" such as in africa. Crude tools of course would be quickly made or simply used rocks to smash open bones but they are always found along with perfect points. The clovis spear points were masterpieces.
On contrary even before the prints were discovered they estimate it to be at least 30,000 years ago because the preserved young Alaskan girl that was frozen. The prints on the contrary make the them assume it's possible humans could've been here since the stone Age. As for the land bridge it was there for over the past 100,000 years with the ice age and disappeared around 30,000 years ago. On the contrary humans migrate out of Africa 60,000 years ago while tools are found in Australia 80,000 years ago. Meanwhile Neanderthals resided in Europe. In regards a site found in San Diego with tools suggest the humans were in North America dating back 130,000 years ago which people are really trying to deny. Unlike the clovis which were stone tools these tools were made of bone and they used bones to carve tools from more bones. Also that info came in 2017. A lot of new evidence being found recently. The Alaskan girl and the land bridge is fairly old evidence. I think it's fascinating though we're still discovering things modernly. Also I think why they would want to deny possible truths is it'd legitly state that Indigenous people were always in the Americas even through the 2 possible other hominid races we know that resided in Europe and Australia. Tbh I think it's a fair thought. I mean Australia as well humans would've crossed a gap of ocean as well though at one time New Zealand also had a much larger continent and it is practically under water now.
I'm throwing this out there, here is what I believe happened. There were three waves of closely related migrants into the Americas. The first came down the shoreline of the West Coast, island hopping from Asia along the Alaskan coast then south towards what is now California. At first, they did not go into the interior very far, finding all they needed along the coast and up rivers a short distance, their culture fully adapted to sea/river living. They kept going, and very quickly settled all the way to the Southern tip of South America.
The second, and later migration, came over the land bridge and through the ice-free corridor between ice sheets. These people went south, but past the ice sheet they turned east and spread down the Mississippi and over to the Atlantic coast. They thrived until a comet hit the Canadian ice sheet over most likely Quebec, with the force of the blast being sent south over the Eastern part of the ice free Eastern North America, wiping out the vast majority, if not all, of the population. In time, members of the first migration moved east, and even northeast from South America, to fill the void in Eastern North America left by the comet strike.
Then a wave of migration brought yet another closely related people from NE Asia which saw the Athabaskans and related peoples move east and south; Inuit peoples moving north and east. This is just what I have derived from seven decades of gathering information from eclectic sources.
@R Nedlo 2 Esdras 13:40 "Those are the ten tribes, which were caried away prisoners out of their own land, in the time of Osea the king, whom Salmanasar the king of Assyria lead away captive, and he carried them over the waters, and so came they into another land. But they took this council amongst themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt, That they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land.And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the River. For the most high then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. For through that country there was a great way to go; namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth. (America's)
Native Americans are the Biblical Israelites
@@thriftytraveler2001 If so, it would show up in their DNA/language/culture. Not one of those indicators are there.
There were three waves of closely related migrants into the Americas.
@@rnedlo9909 In New Mexico they found Hebrew Artifacts that had the ten commandments, Truth is coming out and jesus is coming really soon. google "Los Lunas Decalogue Stone ". YOU have yet to PROVE anything commenting back and forth to me.
archaeological site, Monte Verde, Chile - 33.000 years old
Santa Barbara islands 30 k plus years ago.
Most probably. You can see land across from Siberia to Alaska. From a boat.
( High Mountains visible. )
kindly google Beringia ...
Eh? Read a book!
Flunk. Bering Island blocks the view to see Alaska and in bad weather you cant see it at all. I can not see Catalina Island from Long beach which is 29 miles and you can see Alaska from Siberia, Use critical thinking skills.
@@NEWYORKNEWYORK7 no smog 13000 years ago. Long Beach
Ok now lets go back say 40,000 years. In the middle of an Ice Age a constant -25F no summer to speak of. That land bridge is a 100 foot thick sheet of ice. Devoid of food... walking through 3 feet of snow with nothing to eat!!! What do you think your rate of survival would be? None of the Inuit look alike groups moved south. The Mongolians, the Greenland Inuit, the Laplanders, the Siberian Steppe people!!!! thy are all still there.
And, they are all very territorial. Food and supplies are extremely scarce in the Arctic.
If you do not know how to survive in this area you die. Just like the early explorers who ventured into the Arctic. They starved to death or they froze. It is the same today as it was 40,000 years ago. Nobody in their right mind ventured into the Arctic without the knowledge of how to survive there. If anything, it was coastal foragers who followed the edge of the ice pack to North America. A peoples that know how to harvest Sea mammals and fishes. Knew that rendered whale fat made fire. I believe the Haida are some of those people.
What about the Meadowcroft site in New England? Dates go back to 35,000 years. Some First Nations on the BC coastal Islands have been separate populations for 25,000 years.
Many sites/remains have been dated well over 100,000 so even those numbers are off. These findings are always covered-up and suppressed. There are even findings beyond one million years; the problem is we do not dig down deep enough to get to the true beginning, if that's even possible.
Probably because it`s not convenient for the main stream of the scientific community. There were sites with findings dating over 25,000 in Brazil as well.
@WAFFEN COLLIDER www.haidagwaiiobserver.com/local-news/study-re-traces-the-environment-of-ice-age-haida-gwaii/
Meadowcroft is in southwest Pennsylvania, not New England.
is carbon dating off? Are we as humans older then we think?
Danish researchers have proven the land corridor theory is impossible, for over a thousand years after it first opened the corridor was a uninhabitable frozen rock desert that stretched for over a thousand miles with almost no vegetation, any animals including humans that attempted the journey through the corridor would have starved throwing their dates even further out of the realm of possibility, not even including sites like Monte Verde also showing it was impossible.
Corridor now dated: it was open to buffalo by about ~13,500 BP, perhaps slightly later. By 13,000 it was wide open for sure. How does that fit?
@@nmarbletoe8210 Going to trust in those Danish scientists and the fact that sites like Monte Verde are simply too old to make the ice corridor theory possible. Its funny how people hold onto old theories for years after the facts simply do not line up anymore.
I live in Alaska. As I understand it, the first people to arrive here were the ancestors of the modern Aleuts and they came by sea starting about 25,000 years ago. The short face bear kept humans out on land until it went extinct about 12,000 years ago.
Where did the Aleuts come from. I know also about the Vikings coming over long before Columbus.
@@jacquesjanssen7361 They migrated from the islands off the Russian coast. Except that was long before it was Russian. The cave bear kept humans from migrating into North America for a long time. No bears on the islands.
"The short face bear kept humans out on land until it went extinct about 12,000 years ago." that is just duuumbah
The life style of Northern islanders in Chishima/Kuril were paleolithic one of seafarer nomad and could be a candidate people who had
entered American new continent through kelp highway by boats.
Why are the largest concentrations of clovis points found in eastern US if they originated from Asia?
The Smithsonian made an article awhile back basically saying that there is too much genetic, cultural, and linguistic diversity to be from one source population. They admitted racism influenced this too. The truth will come out
@@corneliusjohnson5963 they found a couple ships from greece and rome off of south america, as well as african stylized art such as stone carved heads in south america, also one of the oldest skulls found in south american was aferican.
what im getting at is the winds blow off of africa and push to the americas (think of the hurricanes that hit the united states east coast). if boats were trapped in a storm they could easily get blown down there and survive as long as they had enough food, water, and could survive the ocean. that is a possibility, but on the other side of the americas
Kyle Oien stating that which is not, doesn’t make it so.
As for the Clovis points, there’s clearly earlier sites. Clovis was not first. Your solutrean hypothesis is now discounted by archaeologists. Genetics have shot this idea down. Perhaps the eastern half of the United States was friendlier to the fauna they were hunting. People did follow food...hence the hunter and gather idea.
Discounting the Solutrean Hypothesis is a bit premature. Sure, genetic code, none noted in current populations of the Americas. As with the Mega Fauna the hominids disappeared between the Pleistocene & Holocene in North America. In all likelihood due to multiple comet impacts across North America. Randal Carlton & Kosmographia delve deep into the fingerprints of Mass destruction during the Younger Dryas. Arctic Core Samples support this. Ocean Core Sample meltwater pulse 1a & 1b support this. No Clovis after the black mat layer. The people’s & mega fauna where all lost to cataclysm. New population spread across the Americas. Hence no genetic markers in today’s population
During the last iceage the so-called ice-free corridor was too cold for wildlife, very few habitation sites, the Upper Porcupine River an epic journey with no resources.
Beringia wasn't separated until 12,000yrs ago, the recent 23ky-21ky old footprints at WhiteSandsNP point to an older timeline. The coast of Beringia was a desert, the central part graze for megafauna who migrated east-west to winter refugia with graze.
The coast to a few miles inland was liveable, bear & forest survived north of Vancouver Is. and about 36ky a warming of 1200y-1400y occurred so my pick for early moves south with Holocene temps.
Icy NWesterly trade winds flowed from Siberia kept the north shore vacant during a glacial max.
The timing of Leakey's finds at Calico, CA, USA, is circa the previous interglacial, that is tantalizingly likely to be valid work with Peking Man in place long before.
Fun stuff ☕️
What nonsense.
South American Archaeologists have long said the first peoples came across to Chile directly from the Polynesian islands 50K years ago and longer. Trade winds, island hopping (oceans were 300-400ft lower then) and only 5000 miles, not the loopy notion of a 12 000mile roundabout marathon.
DNA is also bearing it out.
This is really interesting -- can you suggest any books/articles to read more about it?
@@gandalfs-pants Yep, Graham Hancock, America Before " the Key to Earth's Lost Civilisation " I have it on Audible but in any good bookstore also. Enjoy and free your mind.
Any reputable sources?
Graham Hancock is a well-known fraud.
But only there, they didnt reach further.
Wouldn't there be 50,000yr old evidence on the Polynesian Islands then?
Correction: Beringia not Bering Strait, land routes not land-bridge.
Just finding out first Americans arrived by boat? No one said they arrived by plane though.. something tells me it means the Natives though.
Not arrived trans ocean by boat.
If Clovis was a asiatic technology you would expect to see previous forms of the technology in Siberia.....Rather than in southwestern europe.
wow… very good point. You change the game with that line of thinking
just because a rock made by native americans vaguely looks like european knapping doesnt prove anything. same way mayan codexs and writing might resemble that of european/mesopatamian writing does not indicate that they were invented together coincidences arent serious evidence
Don't forget the 20000 year old footprints in New Mexico
But if we assume early humans moved by boat then how did all the early big game animals like elk move into North America? If the big animals moved across the bridge then it makes sense humans may have done the same. My guess is humans probably did both, some by boat and some by land.
The large animals were here since the the worlds land mass was all connected, pangea, as it was called. When the super continent broke up the animals were distributed across all the different parts that seperated.
@@carlkerstann8343 and who knows maybe some early hominids too ?
There's been several glacial periods, the one talked about in this video is the latest. But such animals would've crossed millions of years before humans.
@@ottodidakt3069 The first ancestor of the nowdays Hominids originated 7 millions years ago, but, at this rate, the continent format were already separeted, almost identical with the today's world.
It's totally possible and has good evidence.i think the point of this hypothesis is that the sea travel explored further down the route, much sooner because it's faster
@ 1:34 Sea level rose 120 meters or 393 feet. There fixed it.
So liberals are right except they got the date wrong.
This story neglects to talk about pre-homo sapiens inhabitants of North America. Homo erectus was a seafaring species as well.
The video wasn’t about conjecture or what ifs.
@@macarde10 Sure it was. You don't know the scientific process.
I see no neglect, as there is no evidence of Homo Erectus in the Americas.
If migrants from Asia traveled to North America by boat and if Australian aborigines sailed to South America by boat why couldn't Europeans have sailed to North America by boat?
From some place(s) in Europe to some place(s) in North America is a shorter distance than a sail from Australia to South America especially considering the Aborigines would also have no destination in mind.
Quite possible. Evidence limited so far.
Humans probably came in waves, by sea and then land. Just as they migrated later.
..and not all from Asia..
I dont people travelled through land in ancient times
I humbly think the answer will be a bit grey n fuzzy. We tend to forget that different groups were evolving quite separately in different areas and environments. I think it most likely there were a few different initial migrations from groups with different skillsets/specialties ... Island hopping boaties, land based nomadic game hunters etc. Discounting the water faring route does seem particularly disingenuous though, given the Australian and South Pacific colonisations
My personal issue with the Polynesian theory is that there aren't to my knowledge any archaeological sites in the Pacific islands that old (~20,000 BP). I personally think the first wave sailed down the Pacific coast, occasionally entering the interior via estuaries like the Columbia and San Francisco Bay, and later waves went inland.
Of course they went down the coast. There is a lot of easy food to be had along the rocks in the ocean. They could have walked it too in a few generations.
lol yeh easy food until you run into the Haida. They love it when people steal their food. Same as the Plains indians.. they never minded people crossing their land and stealing their food.
Migrating a mile per year gets you 1000 miles in as many years.
S. Americans will tell you their ancestors boated along the coasts. I believe they walked and sailed to the Americas.
"Hey! lets take a long-ass hike over some of the roughest, coldest terrain in the world, so we can hunt huge critters that can easily stomp us! It will probably take weeks and months, and we'll probably only have a few hours of sunlight everyday. We'll go through an endless valley of glaciers that will be so beautiful!
-said no one. ever.
Walking into the unknown for months with a family unit over glaciated mountains, then across a continental ice sheet is extremely unlikely. It would have been so much easier to make your way down the coast following the migrating birds and sea life. Even in primitive boats, there would have been much less risk, and more sustenance. I believe there were people in NA and then SA well over 20,000 years ago. There would have been a flood of people following 13K years ago, when the ice sheets finally melted.
In the middle of an ice age when half of North America is covered in glaciers, somehow there is this ice free corridor starting it northern Alaska stretching through Canada.
@@coyoteken1000 yeah I can't explain why it either, no one can...it's a miracle.
I figure they'd follow the food. Hunters from the interior would pursue migratory mammals while coastal fishermen and gatherers at low tide would gradually migrate down the coast.
There are traces in the genetic record of Europeans in the eastern North American Indigenous population. They sailed along the ice edge across The Atlantic Ocean to areas south of present New Jersey area.
Very small traces. Very small population made it here.
Aaaaah...You guys know that Brazil has stone chips and rock paintings of about 100 and 50 thousand years, right?
(In the Serra da Capivara Park :D)
The rock art is being dated to around 25,000 years ago, while a small number of eminent rock art specialists are proposing an even earlier date - perhaps as far back as 36,000 years ago.
The first American followed the big animals across the polar ice cap. That was their food. They may also have come by boat and probably did pursuing different food sources.
Surf n turf.
I can see how Alaska and Canada was inhabitted by siberian bering strait crossing. But central and south america from bering straight makes no sense at all . What would drive any human society to walk from Alaska to to Peru ? What can they find in the andes that they didnt find i now US , Mexico and so on !
They look more like Polynesians maybe from Polynesians
Samoans and Central Americans natives kinda look similar
@@nstark9897 not at all bro . Not at all
@chapinrey : No one said that any one generation traveled all that way on foot (or otherwise even). It could have taken 100's or even 1.000's of years. You could travel that far in a 100 generations by simply moving less than 50 miles (or whatever it is mathematically) with each new generation. But the main *fact* is this: we will *never have all the facts.* Anyone who says more than that is simply making assumptions.
@@nstark9897
Yes they do, Hawaiians too
Radiocarbon dates in the range of 22,500 radiocarbon years (about 26,000 calibrated) were found in the area of the purported Ice Free Corridor - indicated glaciation followed that time, and that megafauna was present, and the area open for migration. The area was fully glaciated during the time of the commonly assumed Ice Free Corridor - indicating the only time it wasn’t open for travel was during the time that the classical hypothesis said it should have been open. The classical Ice Free Corridor is 180 degrees out of phase with the glacial record. The earlier non glacial interval was in synch with, and makes plausible, and overland route before the last (Late Wisconsinan) glaciation. (Young et al 1994, Young et al 1999).
Pales in comparison to the Solutreans, who travelled from Europe to the East coast of America 25,000 years ago. There are archeological sights in South Carolina and other states which prove this beyond doubt.
Nah europeans are liar,they are not seafarers
Only on TV. The actual science is very doubtful, lacking any DNA evidence.
I just watched a great presentation by the Beringia Centre in the Yukon that examined Obsidian tools, such as micro blades and spear tips. The obsidian was obtained near the edge of the last glacial maximum. North west coast of Washington and Southern coast of British Columbia in Canada. They show that the migration through the two ice sheets in western Canada, actually goes from South to North. With the oldest dated tools towards the south. Totally supports the theory that the first people of North America arrived by sea and then started colonizing ice free areas.
Don’t know when this video was made, but it is outdated. There were different waves of peoples migrating to the Americas from Siberia of different cultures and periods. Genetics/DNA is writing a more accurate history. There is some evidence that South America was populated by some Australian/Melanesia peoples as some genetics/DNA analysis indicates. I believe that migration took different routes.
That same study argues that the austromelanesian mtdna occurred at some point in Asia, they believe that an extinct ancestral population mixed with the ancestors of native Americans and eventual with other austromelanesians. There’s also a study which believes the actual mixing took place more recently at around 11-13k bc.
There is actually research that indicates that pacific islanders originated out of what is British Columbia, landing first in Hawaii then spreading. Meanwhile other research indicates that the just before them other people migrated (in far less numbers), believe it or not but he DNA link is solid, from what was Persia into Europe then down the African west coast the into the Caribbean, then central and south America, over to Easter Island and landed in NZ a few hundred years before the Maori who descend from the other Pacific Islanders.
The second migration cited is very controversial, not for scientific reasons, but because of the dominant dogma on the subject and the huge legal problem it poses for the Maori claims and their legal settlement with the NZ gov't.
The Asia to Pacific Islands migration theory has been ruled out several times, one good reason is that when navigating by winds and currents as we suppose they did then it doesn't fit. It's actually way easier (including accidentally) to go from the SA west coast to Easter Island and back than from Asia to the islands.
Human history as it was taught to us is cracking on all sides but It will probably take a few more decades to be revised, requiring more undebatable scientific data AND overcoming dogma inherited from the past 2 centuries. So the real story of human expansion is yet to be discovered, and it just may be way more complex than we thought !
Came from many different areas..means of travel..different time periods
These are hypotheses, not theories.
If you were a hunter gatherer and you had a choice to live off of kelp and slow fat sea cows or 9 ton mastadons or 3 ton bison which would you choose?
So yeah, obviously boats.
one could easily reverse that logic and conclude the contrary
@@ottodidakt3069 please build your hypothesis and explain it to me
@@williamesselman3102 If you had a choice between running mammoths off of cliffs or freezing your ass off harvesting stinky kelp and bobbing up and down on a plank in a frozen dark deep scary wild ocean desperately trying to get around giant ice cliffs which would you choose
so yeah obviously mocassins
not saying your historically wrong, but the logic changes on the perspective
@@ottodidakt3069 I think that's a good point. But if my memory serves me correctly, they set off with a much different climate. If I'm remembering correctly, it was not cold, the sea lions were plentiful as well as the kelp. So in the beginning it would make sense to take the easy Road. But as the climate changed what they once had would be irrelevant because it would just be stories they told their children. Maybe my memory is slipping. It's been a year since I watched it.
Cool name
Those coastal campsites do not have to march sequentially southward along the coast. That’s the way an amateur thinks. Separate groups would maybe stop at an established site, or just as likely (1) stop short of it, not knowing of its existence. Or, (2) press on to make more miles that day.
In general, it would be appealing to expect their ages to decrease as you go southwards, but that could also be a bad assumption. There may well be large time gaps between groups, completely messing up neat theories. Better th first gather the evidence before theorizing about wha unfound evidence will be, let alone what it could mean.
Courtesy of Half Vast Flying
It's always cool to learn the stuff you learned as a kid is outdated!!!
When I was a kid the theory of the dinosaur origin of the birds was still controversial.
Still from the north, when will the southern pacific island chains be considered with lower sea levels?
Worth noting: archeologists now believe paleolithic Asians were seafaring well within the earliest windows of time when people could have jumped from Beringia to coastal north America: evidence points to paleolithic arrival by sea to the Ryuku islands approx. 35k-30k bp.
No. They migrated from Asia.
@@divergentintegral3475 Where in my comments do I say they did not migrate from Asia?
@@zacharyferreira2469 There was a land bridge. No need for boats, except to harvest sea mammals in coastal waters.
@@donaldclifford5763 I am not denying the existence of Beringia (much more than just a land bridge). The issue is not “how did people get from Siberia to Alaska?”. The issue is “How did people get from Alaska to the rest of the Americas?” There was an enormous ice sheet covering all of Canada, all the way to the Pacific Ocean. There was no way for people to walk from Beringia to the Americas until the ice free corridor opened up, but it is very probable that people were in the Americas long before the ice free corridor opened up, or so it seems with today’s evidence. So, coastal navigation from Beringia down the Pacific coast seems to be the best hypothesis.
I remember archeologists bashing someone's career because they considered the land bridge theory as irrefutable fact.
Sounds like you are assuming all humans came from up north🤔 how do you know there were no humans that came from the South to get to America?? 🤔
Some evidence supports a separate Polynesian style migration.
Around 830 AD native Americans reached Easter Island. Several times.
WHy the stupid background music?
went to a Parks Canada lecture in Victoria, BC about an excavation between the high and low tide lines in BC's Queen Charlottes', now Haida G., and you can''t IMAGINE the difficulty, not even counting the BUGS all day. Coming down the coast the boats would be far, far out and the islands were grasslands, home of large bear NOT black bear or cedar and sitka stands today.
Archelogy is like a religion with it's priests guarding their beliefs
no
@@nmarbletoe8210 Yes.
No. If it was, they wouldn't have changed their minds.
Ok Graham. Sure...
@@Wahunganganshapunck Billy Graham ?
The one went to Cali not the ones in ky I believe they still remember languages some from beringia And more native American and me half and half European
But american
How do you carbon date a stone that is as old as dirt to be 11,000 thousand years old?
you cant carbon date stone, only organic matter. They probably found the stone buried deeper than some wood or plant fibres, and carbon dated those to put the stone in context
Stone is older than dirt.
Another site in Boulder Colorado had items radio carbon dated at 18,000 plus years. In from the coast or down the chute from inland Canada. Nice job prehistoric people!
If people from Taiwan and Southeast Asia (the Austronesian ppls) managed to colonize and leave their descendants on islands spreaded as far apart from Madagascar to Easter island, Hawaii and New Zealand, then it's safe to say that they could be another missing link in the peopling of the Americas. Its been proven that there has been intermingling with the Polynesians and native Americans via the botanical exchange of sweet potatoes and chickens, as well as DNA evidence in the islands closest to the Americas, namely the Marquesas and easter islands.
The curious thing is why they thought they would travel by any other means. The seas / rivers were the highways of old
Everyone knows fishing is easier than hunting
Everyone knows it's warmer on the coast than in the continental interior.
In a boat, you can access the most productive environment on earth, the intertidal. You can also carry all your gear, easily. On land, every ounce has to be carried on your back. And the boats allow access ro marine hunting.
Every explanation of how native Americans arrived in the Americans is wishy washy
Im a fim believer of the bering strait land bridge theory. but when. who knows. Im apache and if your navajo. you cant deny the resmblance to asians. yes over time the land shaped us. but I mean cmon. at some point in time people came from africa, split off and then eventually came to americas. who knows they coulda walked all the way to chili and brazil.
Andrew Essence why are there pyramids and and in Central America. Why does almost every tribe in America have a flood story. Why do native Americans have a story of a white savior creator who came and said he would come back in the future. How did sweet potatoes get to the Polynesian islands.
There is very little evidence of Asian influence in Native American culture. I think there may have been a few Asians that made it over. For sure no Africans. But for the most part I’m pretty sure the native population is mostly Jews. It all makes sense.
@@drewdown826 DNA evidence suggests migration across the Pacific directly from the Polynesian land mass (50K years ago the oceans were 300-400ft lower) by way of island hopping to Chile. That was one migration. The Bering movement also happened. Still others came across the Atlantic (Solutreans) from southern Spain and France areas approx 16-20K years ago.This is why the Native American Haplogroups are so mixed.
Plenty of solid evidence but politically driven narratives in North America are threatened by it.
@@navajokimball7573 Not Jews - Atlanteans. Jews never built pyramids and are predated by Phoenicians who were definitely on the east coast in 2000BC. Tablets and writings have been found.
Long before the Phoenicians, there were the Caucasians who's perfectly preserved mummies were found in the Windover bog in Florida and gene testing revealed European Caucasians 7000yrs ago.
Always remember, two things can be equally true.
Why should we assume they came down via Beringia? It's much more believable that South American natives crossed over from Polynesia.
And data-backed fact, actually. North American academics don't like that inconvenient truth, however, as it collides with their politically motivated narrative.
siriusisastar considering that not all scientists are American, or white... that’s just a silly claim. Genetics can trace human migrations. Guess what, they show a bottleneck effect. Which does seem to support Beringia as a crossing point. Considering eastern Polynesia wasn’t settled until later, I don’t think Polynesia is the source of native Americans.
Why no Polynesian dna in other countries bisided chile? and peru why until this day chile has Polynesian chikens only found in Polynesian?
Not all natives belong to the same race, that's why all ancient cities have differnt style.
@@newmind4850 Right. My point, exactly.
Traveling by water is much more economical and likely they had fish as part of their diet. This makes more sense than wandering into a strange land with unknown dangers by foot. The distribution of human habitation of Pacific Islands further makes this credible.
This is such BS! If the original Americans came across the Bering Strait, why is it that the people in N. and S. Americas don't appear to have a little Asian phenotype?
What about the Black Aboriginal that were already here??
They will never admit it, but yup Americans don't look Asian at all. But if that Asian mixed with black then that phenotype changes a lot.
the hell you talking bout, have you seen eskimos, navajo,
No Africans anywhere in N or S America before a few hundred years ago.. Try again.
How can yoy that stupid
Let me guess u are an american right?
What ever happen to the sites i learned about in college, one along a lake in texas and the other in pantigonia that were dated to 40,000 years ago from national geographic.
IDK. Try Google.
Science changes constantly as we find new things. Some of the geology I learned in college in the '60's has changed too. The internet is your oyster.
I found this to be an appropriate watch after Columbus day parade madness
Isn't Columbus day like Christmas by now? Harmless in it's innocence at this point I'd say, because there are probably only as many people who believe Columbus discovered America as there are people who believe Santa Claus brings them presents every December the 25th, lols.
Let them believe if that helps them feel like a kid again. ^-^
Aylbdr Madison Well Santa Claus is harmless fun really hurts no one. Telling children that Columbus discovered America and had dinner with the pilgrims and “Indians” is going to inevitably lead to other harmful misinformation which hurts indigenous people.
Please explain how stone tools were radiocarbon dated.
Stone tools aren't radio carbon dated. There are many other radiometric dating techniques we use to date stone
Although we could date stone tools which are found in temporal proximity to carbon based materials which can be carbon dated.
I am so Soorey these are the first Canadians :)
Canada is in the Americas.
Do not forget that the Ice Sheets and kinds of animals that allowed peoples like the Inuit to exist on them extended deeper into and across the Atlantic Ocean. While hard to prove but research is being done in that area as well. There may have been more than one path to migration.
I mean...how can you carbon date a stone as an arrowhead as opposed to the rock that it is by different time periods?
A search engine is quite helpful when you don't know something.
Just a thought from someone who grew up in a time when you would have to walk to the library instead.
Obsidian, will absorb water at a very slow but measurable rate. Once a projectile point has been knapped out of of a larger stone, or it has been broken exposing fresh material on the inside, it is then free to start absorbing water from the environment, starting the timer so to speak. The "rind" or depth of water saturation can be examined giving a means to make an estimation on age.
I recall anthropologists pointing out that in prehistoric Europe the seaways were principal paths of migration rather than barriers. Why not in North America? Aren't the oldest human remains in the Americas from islands off the coast of California?
If most experts believe it true, it is most likely false...."Farris's razor"
The Pacific Islanders could travel across vast ocean distances to settle such remote places as Hawai’i and Rapa Nui, and the Northern peoples such as Inuit/Alaskan Natives can thrive in the Arctic. The peoples settling the Western Hemisphere would find traveling down the coast knowing there’s a continent on one side would not be an insurmountable challenge.
I don't know what appeal this "romantic delusion" involving watercraft has but its persistence is astonishing. A review of the temperatures in the North Pacific/Aleutians shows it to be a very cold place and one of the last areas settled by human beings. The DNA science ties Native Americans to Siberians near the southern area around Lake Baikal, and I wish people would shed their two-dimensional thinking and look at an actual world globe.
Except that the Berengia land bridge existed during the era when humans were migrating from Siberia to North America. Now let me repeat what I said about temperatures in that part of the world. The Eskimos/Aleuts were latecomers, on the order of 6-10 thousand years afterwards.
But thanks for proving my point about the appeal of that "romantic delusion."
Well, yes, but the "ice free corridor" may not have even existed at that time, and people travelling such a route would not leave artifacts along the coast. On the other hand, people who lived along Lake Baikal might easily have developed water transportation skills, and used them to skirt the land bridge while fishing or pursuing marine mammals. If anything qualifies as a "romantic delusion," it would be bands of hearty hunters bravely chasing megafauna across the land bridge and deep into a new continent.
As over 80% of the current human population live within a few miles of water, that waterlogged boats have been found in inland bogs in Europe dating to 14k years ago your opposition to the idea that the easiest method for such rapid expansion was by water seems deliberately obtuse - how do you think aborigines got to fucking Australia 50,000 years ago? Were they able to walk on water back then? As sea levels have risen post ice age much of the coast they would have stopped and possibly formed settlements on are now under water - the island chains in the North Sea in Europe were connected by boat 40k years ago, we are only just finding the data as it is now 60 metres BELOW the current surface. If people were using boats in Northern Europe and Australia at around the same time, the tech was wide spread, the idea that nomads followed Mammoths, cos that was the ONLY thing they hunted is farcical, how often could they take down prey of that size do you think? Able to do that regularly but NOT build boats? As for ou idiotic temperature argument, what the fuck do you think the Inuit do when it gets chilly? Walk every where? Grow a fucking brain you half wit
@ @@Cheeseatingjunlista #remedial schoolteacher voice on
Posters like you make me wish there were minimum mandatory requirements to operate a computer and a "driver's license" required on the "Information Superhighway." Of course that's obvious to anyone looking at your convoluted grammar, syntax, and spelling. But let's have a "geology class," and perhaps by the time I'm finishing skewering, you'll at least have learned the difference between profanity and profundity and learn it's not polite to be a potty mouth.
Item: How did the first Australians arrive on that continent? Answer: They walked.
www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/science/aboriginal-australians-dna-origins-australia.html
>>All living Aboriginal Australians descend from a single founding population that arrived about 50,000 years ago, the study shows. They swept around the continent, along the coasts, in a matter of centuries. And yet, for tens of thousands of years after, those populations remained isolated, rarely mixing.
>>Fifty thousand years ago, sea levels were so low that Australia and New Guinea formed a single continent. Humans moved from Southeast Asia onto this landmass, some settling in what is now New Guinea, others traveling farther south into Australia.
Sorry, Einstupid, no boats... Here's another summary of the same facts:
www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worlds-oldest-civilization
>>Around 50,000 years ago, the wave of migration reached Sahul, a prehistoric supercontinent composed of present-day Australia, Tasmania and New Guinea prior to their separation by rising sea levels 10,000 years ago. At that time, according to the study’s authors, Aboriginal Australians became genetically isolated, making it the world’s oldest civilization.
And seriously this scientist, Eske Willerslev, is probably my favorite molecular biologist out of a number of them, all really sharp. He's the individual who sequenced the DNA of Kennewick Man, incidentally, and by identifying that individual's mitochondrial haplogroup as X2a, made another "boat champion" (Dennis Stanford) look really foolish.
>>“It’s a really weird scenario,” said evolutionary geneticist Eske Willerslev, a lead author of the study and a professor at the Center for GeoGenetics at the University of Copenhagen. “A few immigrants appear in different villages and communities around Australia. They change the way people speak and think; then they disappear, like ghosts. And people just carry on living in isolation the same way they always have. This may have happened for religious or cultural reasons that we can only speculate about. But in genetic terms, we have never seen anything like it before.”
Eske was speaking about how the language of Aussie Aboriginals is really "young" (4,000 years) in comparison with the DNA evidence and the landmass that permitted an ancient migration to Australia.
@@randywright9571
Way to strawman, chief. Kudos for nitpicking the minor point of whether or not Australians arrived by sea, while completely ignoring the point at issue, of whether its *possible* that Humans had 'boats' 15000 years ago. But lets not dwell on that and look at the larger fallacy of identifying a people, by their technology; in the case of Clovis, by a feature added-on to otherwise typical stone tools. Its always been a problem, resolving the rapidity of Clovis spread down the continent. However, if we look at it not as a spread of populations, but a dissemination of a specific innovation, throughout an established population? Then theres also the assumption that samples are nominally representative and not the 'Cadillac' model. Its highly likely that the characteristic fluting of Clovis points(a feature many expert knappers struggle with), is an option and that most of their tools were more conventional(as many such 'common' tools have been found alongside characteristic 'Clovis'). This creates a number of problems with using a flake removal on an otherwise unremarkable point, to track the spread of a group. We can look at this feature on different artifacts and say that its the same technology, but we cannot say who made it, or if it was an independent discovery(as we are seeing more and more of, in the prehistoric). Its entirely possible that migration took place much sooner than thought(and possibly from multiple points) and the Americas were already actively populated at the time the Clovis Innovation occurred.
The overarching point being that numerous documented sites blow away Canadian Corridor dogma, by thousands of years. Sooo... apparently, someone is wrong.
also i must point out.
that the white sands desert is in the middle of the western hemisphere. They didn't fall out of the sky and land in the desert
like they were playing C.O.D.
The bible says as much.
It also says that there was a day and night cycle before the sun was created.
@@annoyed707 where was that? i know historically their was a time when their was no moon, a long period of time spread through oral tradition. But i didn't notice nothing about day and night before the lights where placed especially in the bible. I wouldn't mind seeing what you talking about though. But if its the fact that the first stanzas before it mentions creations its because the first 3 parts of genesis are events that came after but placed before as title and descriptors based on the hebrew marks. However about our people being here from boat long before anyone else their are historians have had the records for along time now of the journey it took to come here so some of us most certainly came by boat. And the proof was already in the spanish records which is they started campaigning to get all spanish documents dismissed as lies. they also have records that a trade route in peru that stretched through most of south america and up towards the north was called Amarukha, and the people that build it and controlled those area's where a tribe of people that where called the Amaru Khans. Interesting anyway and also factual theirs alot of english records that don't match any other of the records and leave alot of things out.. compared to the other nations which scholars tend to ignore i'm sure to keep their publications relevant as they did with clovis first and many other scientific findings which unfortunately why science wise we have been stuck. Which is not what science was meant to be. but it is what it is.
@@KingKatura The Bible is an extremely historically inaccurate book pls stop
@@draco_1876 Which is why almost everything is based on it? and why all the history lines up? i don't think you know what you are talking about nor have ever read it.
@@KingKatura What? “Everything is based on it” no it’s not. The Bible “historicity” has been debunked numerous times
Sea was 300 feet / 90 meters lower ,
Realized this made it much easier to travel on the Pacific Ocean .
Probably the Atlantic Ocean to
Beach combing and near shore small water craft very likely.
Discussing about Hokkaido route, Ainu aren't indigenous or aborigine at all. They came in 12th century and no relation with First Americans theme completely. They are quite different from Australian Aborigine and American native Indians' situation. Related people for the First Americans are Proto-Japanese Hokkaido（PJH, Hokkaido Sojin）had lived there, northern part of Japanese archipelago, since 35-30,000 years ago though their bones haven' t been found yet. Similar peoples' bones were found in Okinawa, as samples of 36,000~27,000 years ago. On the other hand, their ancestors are famous for crossing sea more than 20km to collect obsidians at Onbase island in Tokyo islands since 38,000 years ago. Any way, it's not Ainu, but Proto-Japanese Hokkaido（PJH）or Hokkaido Sojin as the ancestral candidate people of the First Americans. These're well known matter about Ainu and ancestors, but really very strange of no mentioning from university scholars' side.
its also worth noting that during the ice age, there was a lot more coastline and land to live on than their is today. so a lot of archaeological evidence is very likely underwater. for example, New Jersey at one point extended MUCH further out to sea than it does today, so a lot of evidence is very likely underwater or washed away. the west coast is a bit different due to the continental shelf but in some places this still holds true.
The video notes this.
@@NoahStephens mightve missed it or forgot they mentioned it. Either way, worth emphasizing imo.
Sailed to Cortez island and the others next to it in the 90'. Moonlike but found many sea lions teeth. Going south it was a good introduction to the than more than amazing Baha California and later sea of cortez. Breathtaking all the way above and below the water. And good it never got into USA hands. I did after much research found that even the ones that arrived by boat had mostly never arrived but vanished at sea. There was no maps of where islands were, though starmaps were slowly collected with sticks and sinue. That was possible without much if any travel at first as the sky did the travelling. Collecting information about land even islands one had to move to explore and discover. so many starved to death or drowned because boats could not travel very far due to very simple not long-lasting mast and sail as well as hull quality. Boats often fell appart before reaching a new island. Little room for water or food on these vessels back than. Sails and lines often only lasted a few days to weeks at the most.
But really it is very complex and would take a book or two to cover. Travelers by land lived much like animals did. They did not set out to travel as we now know many thousands of miles by foot but stayed for really long periods of time as long as food was found. Moved on when food was not found or driven by harsh weather. Humans followed the animals. Little was understood about longitudinal or latitude travel. Not much understanding of North and South. Actually similar as today since many people still do not understand that it does not necessarily get warmer travelling south. Especially standing near the equator.
People, you should read “ACROSS ATLANTIC ICE” by: Dennis J. Stanford and Bruce A. Bradley. Traveling the coast by boat and foot just makes sense.
I'm curious about the walrus hunting Inuit and Nunavut related cultures who were moving around Greenland and Svalbard before 100BC. Do they count as discovering americas if they migrated from the east but not if they arrived by coming from the west, through alaska?
There have been no discoveries of Clovis points in Beringia or in Alaska at all.
one areA that archaeology fails is they cant interpolate because of course "everything needs to be proven with evidence". so they find the footprints in white sands at 23,000 and they do have the mental ability to realize "therefore it had to be MUCH sooner since we found these tracks of what had to be tens of thousands already here for a long time" its not within them--they cant do it. so a machinist like me says "those prints documented at 23,000 means AT LEAST 30,000 because of whats not been found or washed away" NOPE WE CANT HAVE THAT ITS AGAINST THE SCIENTIFIC WAY!! these footprints are 23,000 therefore THEY WERE FIRST ARRIVERS AND HIKED DOWN FROM ALASKA A COUPLE YEARS EARLIER.
The problem is the evidence is too limited to form solid conclusions, or even strong hypothesis.
Well they can make that a hypothesis but can't do much until they have the evidence to support it. Until then, it's really just story telling
Time is now repeating itself...6 minutes ago it was 1:59 now it's 1:04 again. Gotta love the time change...
What difference does it make?
Why would they make pit stops in the snow?
Could apply to the east coast as well.
Before you comment, remember this video is 7 years old.
Ancient man was nowhere near the top of the food chain: apart from very limited numbers, predators included sabre-tooth tigers, American lions, dire wolves and short-faced bears.
What I would LOVE to see is a well financed research into just how people from 15000 years ago could build boats sea worthy enough to handle coastal waters. I'd love to see work on this and maybe some full sized prototypes -- and maybe an attempt at recreating such a crossing. A group of seamen of that era would likely have the knowledge of boat handling and weather, though not with weather forecasting like we have now. I think it likely that some but probably not all of the immigrants, the first immigrants, travelled by sea. One would surmise either a hopscotch approach where a group migrates a distance, sets up a foothold camp, and then more join before some of them take the coast further east and south. We don't give 'us' enough credit for what we were able to do 15,000 years ago.
Not hard to imagine some small craft in coastal; waters. And traveling shorelines in search of seafood also likely.
Skin covered boats are full seaworthy. Native Alaskan and Arctic tribes hunt seals and small whales on the open ocean. Building them is a "vernacular" (informal) skill that's been refined over many thousands of years.
@@anim8torfiddler871 Yes, that makes sense, but we're not talking about a handful of people and the distance is large. Yes, there were no doubt waypoints along the Aleutian Chain they could stay for days/weeks/years but ultimately many/most appear to have either returned westward or continued east then southerly.
What would be the practical limit as to how big the boats could have been? How many people could it carry and what was the propulsion. Surely rowing would have been one method that's particularly needed when there's no wind, but surely also they had at least rudimentary sailing abilities with basic sheets for sales. Sheets probably made of skin -- not likely they had a nearby textile mill and hand weaving, though almost certainly within their bag of tricks, might be harder to fashion going back, say 20,000 years or earlier.
Read about Kon Tiki from the 1940's. They build a raft using old techniques and sailed over 4,000 miles. But why suspect humans didn't develop more sophisticated ships? The human brain hasn't advanced much in 200,000 years. Sure the average human wouldn't figure it out, but what about an Elon Musk type from 20,000 years ago? The first airplane to jet happened in less than 1 lifetime. The biblical ark story is over 3,000 years old. And who's to say we won't start a nuclear war and loose all current knowledge within another decade and go back to prehistoric times? Humans are not only capable of incredible intelligence we are capable of incredible stupidity.
Why the distracting music?
So the sea levels rose 125 meters, except in this one part of canada where it rose 2 meters? Is that even possible?
The land bridge circumvented the Earth until the dark ages. North America sank 22 to 28 feet separating the remains of the land bridge.
It’s extremely important to remember that during the height of the ice age, sea levels were 400 feet lower! Exposing large amounts of continental shelf! You could walk to Great Britain, there was no Mediterranean Sea! Black Sea! Were we really need to explore is the shelf’s! Especially where rivers entered the ocean! I’m certain that there’s tons of evidence under water! If it survived.
came by boats? isn't that what you said was preposterous about the Solutrian theory??? It means people could have come from anywhere by boat. Easter island isn't that far from South America, when was it first peopled?
I'm watching Jim Dixon videos; he respects the Solutrian idea as a possibility. It's a coastal route!
On the other hand, Easter Island is a bazillion light years from South America.
There are remote possibilities devoid of evidence. But real evidence supports the out of Siberia theory.