Pre-Clovis People in America: The Solutrean Hypothesis

I don't see the mounting evidence, and I'm a professional archaeologist.It is more likely that tool type spread through parts of Asia and came the long way around.There is mounting evidence for the early coastal migration though. I've found some of that myself.There are some mtDNA studies underway now that might help clarify some of these details. They are finally doing larger studies of the full mitochondrial genome. That will give a lot more precision.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Correct. mtDNA evidence shows one particular haplotype, D4h3, stretching from southern Alaska along the Pacific coast to the tip of South America and almost nowhere else. That has to be from a coastal migration.Edited by Coyote, : Speeling

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

There is a major shift about to take place in the whole argument. Some papers are in the works that I think will show that Clovis was indeed first--but not as now envisioned.I know that is heresy against what used to be heresy, but the stone tool assemblages are obviously the key to the whole thing.The one aspect of all of this that has been overlooked is Clovis in California. All of the standard references ignore California almost completely, but I think that is about to change. There is more and more evidence coming together now that I think will help straighten things out. Can't say much more yet.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

No, those dates are probably pretty close.But I think the standard model of Clovis will be changed considerably.I'll probably know more after Thursday--I'll be meeting with one of the folks who has come up with some new information.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.