Skip navigation

New book reveals Ice Age mariners from Europe were America’s first inhabitants

Some of the earliest humans to inhabit America came from Europe according to a new book Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of America’s Clovis Culture. The book puts forward a compelling case for people from northern Spain traveling to America by boat, following the edge of a sea ice shelf that connected Europe and America during the last Ice Age, 14,000 to 25,000 years ago."Across Atlantic Ice : The Origin of America's Clovis Culture" Across Atlantic Ice is the result of more than a decade’s research by leading archaeologists Bruce Bradley of the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom, and Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. Through archaeological evidence, they turn the long-held theory of the origins of New World populations on its head. For more than 400 years, it has been claimed that people first entered America from Asia, via a land bridge that spanned the Bering Sea. We now know that some people did arrive via this route nearly 15,000 years ago, probably by both land and sea. Eighty years ago, stone tools long believed to have been left by the first New World inhabitants were discovered in New Mexico and named Clovis. These distinctive Clovis stone tools are now dated around 12,000 years ago leading to the recognition that people preceded Clovis into the Americas. No Clovis tools have been found in Alaska or Northeast Asia, but are concentrated in the south eastern United States. Groundbreaking discoveries from the east coast of North America are demonstrating that people who are believed to be Clovis ancestors arrived in this area no later than 18,450 years ago and possibly as early as 23,000 years ago, probably in boats from Europe. These early inhabitants made stone tools that differ in significant ways from the earliest stone tools known in Alaska. It now appears that people entering the New World arrived from more than one direction.

Image left: Dennis Stanford with Clovis stone points from the collection of the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History. (Photo by Chip Clark)

Dennis Stanford with Clovis stone points from the collection of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. (Photo by Chip Clark)

In “Across Atlantic Ice,” the authors trace the origins of Clovis culture from the Solutrean people, who occupied northern Spain and France more than 20,000 years ago. They believe that these people went on to populate America’s east coast, eventually spreading at least as far as Venezuela in South America. The link between Clovis and contemporary Native Americans is not yet clear. Bradley and Stanford do not suggest that the people from Europe were the only ancestors of modern Native Americans. They argue that it is evident that early inhabitants also arrived from Asia, into Alaska, populating America’s western coast. Their ongoing research suggests that the early history of the continent is far more intriguing than we formerly believed. Some of the archaeological evidence analyzed in the book was recovered from deep in the ocean. When the first people arrived in America, sea levels were nearly 130 meters lower than today. The shore lines of 20,000 years ago, which hold much of the evidence left by these early people, are now under the ocean. This is also the case in Europe.

Image left: Clovis-made stone tools in the hands of Bruce Bradley, co-author of Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of America's Clovis Culture. (Photo by Jim Wileman)

Clovis-made stone tools in the hands of Bruce Bradley, co-author of Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of America’s Clovis Culture. (Photo by Jim Wileman)

“We now have really solid evidence that people came from Europe to the New World around 20,000 years ago,” Bradley says. “Our findings represent a paradigm shift in the way we think about America’s early history. We are challenging a very deep-seated belief in how the New World was populated. The story is more intriguing and more complicated than we ever have imagined.” “There are more alternatives than we think in archaeology and we need to have imagination and an open mind when we examine evidence to avoid being stuck in orthodoxy,” Stanford adds. “This book is the result of more than a decade’s work, but it is just the beginning of our journey.” Across Atlantic Ice is published by University California Press, Berkeley.–Source University of Exeter


Tags: , ,


  • I was kicked out of “Native American History” in 1981. The professor and I didn’t see eye to eye on it.
    I KNEW then that the NE Tribes were of Anglo ancestry. Stature, facial traits, hair color, and tools all pointed to a European connection.
    The West Coast was definitely settled from the North and West, but not necessarily all by way of the “land bridge”.

  • Your all going in circles. Read the myan phrofacies. They found Druid symbols in the temples that where blasted at chisanicha Mexico. It was ballast for the Viking ships.
    Imagine if your all right and no one is wrong.
    NA was a tourist and settlement area long before the modern Columbus era came over.

  • to bad who ever made this artical is ass backwards . the solutreans came accross atlantic from europe the clovis came from across berring straight

    • Not true. The oldest Clovis tips were found on the East Coast, and in Norther Spain area. There have been no Clovis found in Alaska. That they came across the land bridge is an old theory that has been shown to be false.

  • Whites were the first inhabitants of the Americas. Don’t let anyone tell you different. There are many examples of this that have been suppressed.

    Many Indian tribes such as the Paiute tribe have oral histories in which they describe battles fought with white skinned red haired peoples known as the Si-Te-Cah.

    There are ancient megalith sites that are identical to sites in Stone Age Europe. Sites include: Burnt Hill, The Shutesbury Chamber, The Harvard Chamber, The Shrine, Palmer Chamber, A lime kiln in Bolton, American Stonehenge at Mystery Hill, The cliff dwellings of the Anasazi.

    South America also evidence of ancient white habitation. The Nazca mummies of Peru had red hair. Spanish accounts of the Incas said many Incas had red hair. The conquistador Pedro Pizarro reported that the ruling class of the Andes Indians were tall red haired and had whiter skin than the Spaniards. The list goes on.

    There are no clean hands. Every nation was forged in blood. Virtually every land was taken from someone else. Everyone has either enslaved or been enslaved. Don’t ever feel guilty for conquests of your ancestors. It is a testament to the warrior blood that flows through your veins.

  • Christiane Schroll

    Jeeze, why can’t people hold an intelligent conversation anymore? Oh look, people are devolving at a faster rate now. If you can’t intelligently discuss the origins of human kind, then just don’t speak.

  • Epiminondas

    Which just goes to show you that humans don’t just spring up out of the soil. All of us came from somewhere else and either pushed others off their soil, or were fortunately the first to come into an empty area. So those of you who continually complain that white men “stole” land from indigenous people need to understand that the only way for a people to become “indigenous” is to conquer someone else and hold the land for a long period of time. Yes, it is that simple. And brutal.

    • Normandie Kent

      This new story has already been debunked, due to many recent genetic studies regarding ancient paleo Indian remains found all over the USA. Kenniwick man was ydns Q-m3 and Mtdna X-2a, also an infant Anzick-1, ydna Q and mtdna d4h3a, his skeleton was 13,000 yrs. he was buried with over a hundred Clovis points. Proving he was from population ancestral to modern NAs. He was ancient Natve american ans so are his Clovis points. This is a dead hypothesis.

      • Epiminondas

        Complete nonsense. I’ve seen those “stories”. None of this is accurate.

      • ScienceLady54

        This story has not been debunked, but the would-be debunkers you favor have certainly been debunked. 1) Haplotype Q is western Asian, not eastern Asian. 2) The Bering land bridge was usually not suitable for crossing early enough to account for humans on NA as early as 20,000-30,000 years ago. 3) The Clovis points originated in northwestern Europe during the peak of the ice age/glaciation in what is now northwestern coastal France by the Solutreans. 4) The Clovis Boy you reference is way too “young” to support the “all Natives are pure Asian” debunked hypothesis–which was always a politically expedient conjuration. 5) There’s much more archaeological evidence between the eastern seaboard and the Mississippi River that predate those who crossed the Bering. 6) Several of the eastern Native tribes have always had lore connecting themselves to non-Asians which the Powell Doctrine–invented in the 1880’s to support “Manifest Destiny”– supporters simply ignored.

      • Bonicushead

        I was about to make you look stupid, but ScienceLady already has.

  • kgregb151

    The Mandan were probably related to proto Europeans that may have come across the sea or land to migrate to where Lewis and Clark found them, otherwise all of the Native Peoples found across North America were shades of brown/yellow, NOT white or black, ONLY the Mandan had “white features”, PERIOD! So he is part correct and otherwise mostly wrong!

    • ScienceLady54

      Wrong. The Mandan were not the only “white-featured,” non-yellow peoples. Those who grew up in Oklahoma–formerly Indian Territory–surrounded by many tribes of eastern origin know this almost instinctively. Bone structure, including height, and facial features are simply too non-Asian. And, there are too many documented 1/4-blood eastern Cherokees with white-blonde hair for just one specific. The Powell Doctrine invented in the 1880’s to support “Manifest Destiny” was a political–not a scientific–construct. The Smithsonian has, since this article, admitted to destroying or “losing” many valuable artifacts since the 1880’s to falsely bolster the Powell Doctrine. There’s good reason that degrees in archaeology are offered in colleges of arts, not colleges of sciences, of most universities–just like “political science.”.

      • Azzmador

        The now extinct Karankawa tribe of southern Texas were famous for their white skin and red hair, as well as being exceptionally tall.

  • I'm Moving !!!!

    nice try

  • Erica Stewart

    This story was printed 3 1/2 years ago, science has moved on, not sure who started this theory up again. Clovis weren’t first. Kennewick was NA, etc. Solutrean has been discredited.

    • Senator Armstrong

      Uh no it hasn’t. The Solutrean thesis is accurate. There have been lots of fossils of blue eyed, red haired mummies with European haplotypes found in America, older than any Amerindian remains.

      • Normandie Kent

        Its hypothesis, not thesis. Like the man said, this article is old, their is so much dna evidence tha refutes this.

        • Senator Armstrong

          lol? There is no DNA evidence whatsoever refuting the Solutrean thesis. It’s a confirmed fact, the oldest mummies found in the Americas are 100% European Celts. Tall, red haired and blue eyed people with European haplotypes. That is all the evidence required.

          Not only that, but if you look into the historical writings of Aztecs, Mayas and so on, their religions and myths revolved around “tall white men with blue eyes who taught us how to farm land”. The religions largely revolved around waiting for their return. Obviously not a coincidence.

          Sounds to me like you’re just a bit anti-white and don’t want to admit, Europeans are natural explorers. Our people always loved exploring the world, looking for new things. So it’s no wonder we were the first in many places.

      • Erica Stewart

        Please cite reference material for this, ie., peer reviewed journal or MSM. Note: the Tarim Mummies were found in China.

  • wreed22

    Global Cooling, Warming, Cooling. Oceans rise,fall,rise. Ice advances,retreats,advances,retreats. I think we might be able to scare the Morons and get some cash flow. That’s the ticket.

    • Boffo Boffington

      I think you may have missed the main point of the book, but nevertheless, your comment is still funny! Hahahhahahahahaah …

      • wreed22

        I note you join JR in the mind reading, supposition category. Very best regards to you.

    • You must of been remarking about yourself with this comment–give your long suffering mirror a break.

    • ericlipps

      Of course there are natural variations in the climate. That, however, doesn’t mean that the current warming is natural. But you can make a pretty good living claiming that it is, or that it’s not happening at all. So what if the vast majority of actual scientists who don’t actually draw paychecks from some oil company say otherwise? They’re all just a bunch of commie eggheads who want to weaken America, right?

      • wreed22

        You offer proof of the vast majority?

        • ericlipps

          You can, if you choose, look it up. I have a life away from the screen, so I won’t bother to do it for you.

          If you can find any evidence in any reputable publication that the majority, or even a sizable minority, of working scientists who have studied this issue have concluded that the current warming has little or nothing to do with human activity (or that it isn’t happening), more power to you. Good luck with that.

          • wreed22

            Nice pass. I make my argument, I make your argument.

          • Cchimudccha

            Nothing can be done with people who have a warped political agenda who refuse to face the facts.

          • ericlipps

            Then you admit that if you look it up, what you’ll find will support my argument. Thanks.

        • Cchimudccha

          2014 hottest year in recorded history? It was until 2015 came along. And it was over 90 degrees today in L.A., and my windows are still open at midnight This is unheard of.

      • Bonicushead

        First of all, not only do all 7 billion human beings alive today know
        that the climate changes, but all 105 billion human beings who ever
        lived knew that the climate changes. So ‘climate denier’ is only to
        demean and discredit anyone who challenges Climate Change, Inc.’s
        science…shows how deceptive and untrustworthy Climate Change, Inc. is.

        Now, let’s examine Climate Change, Inc.‘s actual INTENDED premise: “That human-caused emissions of greenhouse gasses are causing the climate to heat faster than it should, accelerating warming during this current 12,000 year planetary warming cycle.”

        That’s the argument, right? But then Climate Change, Inc. moved from “global warming” to “climate change,” because of the past 18-year plateau (The Plateau), which confounded all of their carbon-based predictive models. They initially began by offering explanations for the plateau that had basis in scientific fact: changes in solar activity, changes in ocean convection patterns, a “Pacific Wind” that cooled the planet was on offer for a while. But there’s a problem: if all those things can cause the planet to cool in a year or two, then how can you make the argument that 150 years of human “warming” activity can’t even overcome a 18 months of “Pacific Wind”?

        You can’t. By making those arguments you PROVE that human contributions are minuscule in comparison to natural forces and so are irrelevant. So they stopped trying to explain it and began
        slandering dissenters as “climate deniers” and started the “War on
        Climate Change,” moving from the sublime to the ridiculous. Since then, we hear the call to “Stop Climate Change,” and about “Legislation to Battle Climate Change,” and dire warnings: “Climate Change Greatest Threat to Humankind,” and so forth.

        Well, here’s your problem with that approach: “Stop climate change.” Right? So where do you want to stop it at?

        Presumably you want to stop it at the correct temperature, right?

        What is the ‘correct’ temperature of the earth’s atmosphere?

        It goes without saying that no one knows. Now, you can make the argument that Climate Change, Inc. are inarticulate and unable to properly express themselves, and that you don’t actually mean you want to stop the climate from changing, only that you want to stop human-caused effects that either inhibit or accelerate natural temperature changes. Nevertheless, with that argument, you STILL need to answer these questions:

        So, what is the “Correct” temperature of the planet earth’s atmosphere today?

        What should it be today if human beings didn’t exist?

        Moreover, since our current activity will “…threaten all life on the planet in 300 years.” what will be the correct—non-human-effected—temperature of the atmosphere in 2315? You absolutely MUST answer this, to support any findings.

    • Cchimudccha

      You’re a real simpleton. In what other age did man have the ability, or any other organism, to mine carboniferous deposits deposited form the origin of life on Earth, and burn it up all at once (a few short generations) and then expect nothing to come of it? Surely, you’re not THAT stupid, are you?

  • So the whole Native Americans were here first line is BS?


    • This isn’t about logic, it’s about scoring debate points.

      • Boffo Boffington

        Oh, no, DroggerMan, you so wrong … is SO MUCH about logic … me know all the authors all and they do so love the debate very much, but are slaves to the logic and the science … would NEVER put forward a hypothesis for the purpose of the debate alone, no matter how much the fun of the dancing … hahahahahahaha

    • The Truthinator

      lmfao Early Europeans were always WHITE you dunce bucket. Do not breed.

      • Lars Teeney

        No way, all humans emerged from out of Africa, which would mean the white properties evolved to adapt to colder conditions.

        • The Truthinator

          lmfao The ignorance. It’s been proven that the Out of Africa theory is false. Try again when you stop parroting outdated nonsense.

        • Bonicushead

          Wrong. Why do blacks have lighter palms and bottoms of feet, while we have no such variation? The African theory has been debunked in 2013 by the 7 million years older Asia find.

          • ericlipps

            “We” have no such variation because “we” are light all over.

      • hereinWA

        LOL, back at ya, idiot. No, they were not. OMG, so much stupid crammed in one stupid box. Look up the Native people of almost any European land. Not. White.

    • Boffo Boffington

      sooooo … you’re saying because these people came-in on the east side, rather than from the west, that means they can’t be native Americans ??? whuuuuutttttttt ???? How you figure dat ??? What you think native American, appear like magic, or come like alien from outer space ???

      • Normandie Kent

        Native Americans at 30,000 yrs. compared to Europeans at 400 yrs. the ones that came from east definitely not native

    • Nathan Prophet

      By definition they were Native Americans regardless of where they originated. All of humanity began in Africa. Duh.

      • Someone doesn’t understand natural selection, evolution, and environmental pressures. DNA noob.

      • Christiane Schroll

        You do realize that all of humanity began when Pangea still existed right? And even those early man migrated to parts of Africa from other parts of Pangea. Jeeze! If that was the case, we’d all have traces of African DNA… which we don’t.

      • Bonicushead

        Africa is no longer the birth place of all humans. In 2003 our newest oldest relative was discovered on a farm, and after 10yrs of multinational expert examination and triple testing of all findings by all involved nations, in 2013 we were introduced to this newest oldest relative…and it is absolutely more significant in more ways than one, in fact, it’s name comes from one of these features.

        But first, it is 7 million years older than the Africa find, and from Asia…

        And second…do you know how the posters showing evolution have a missing “link” between the crouched primate and the upright primate?

        For those that may not know, that spot is blank because starting with the Africa find, and extending millions of years until that blank spot, all of those primates have a foot structure called “Tarsier”.
        ALL primates with tarsier feet can only stand upright for extremely short periods of time because it is quite painful. ALL members of apes have tarsier feet and you can see how even when trained to walk upright, it is odd and not very efficient.

        Starting with the primate after the blank spot, every one of those primates up to modern human, you and I, have a foot structure called “Anthropoid”.

        Before blank spot tarsier, after blank spot anthropoid.

        The reason the spot is blank, is because absolutely nowhere in earth’s geological timetable/geologic time scale, is there any explanation for how the foot structure changed without evolution to allow for sustained upright travel, nor why the change only happened to humans despite many apes existing in the same environment.

        The most significant development in human evolution…increased mobility, better extension to more food choices, and for the first time humankind went from prey to predator…all of those advancements came by way of a foot structure for which there is no explanation for why it came to be ours, nor why only ours.

        That is why it is called the “Missing Link”.

        Now, the name of our original relative… “Archicebus achilles”. It get’s
        it’s name because of it’s arch and it’s Achilles tendon…OUR arch and
        OUR tendon.

        That’s right, 7 MILLION YEARS OLDER than the oldest primate on the chart, and yet it has our anthropoid foot structure credited to some unknown missing link.

        While some believe this is the missing link, I believe predating all others by 7 million years means science has to once again re-interpret their findings, because all findings have unknowingly been flawed by using the Africa find, causing the missing link explanation for when we separated from apes, because of the unexplained foot structure.

        But I think the unexplainable is because the answer is wrong. At 7 million years older, our feet did not evolve from anything, it was here.

        I think the missing link chart should be cut into two. Everything before
        the “link” spot should continue to follow the evolution of apes all the
        way to right now.

        And everything after the “link” spot, needs to start with our newest oldest relative and begin a new chart all the way until right now, with no more “missing link” spot.

        • Tammy

          If I understand what I think you are saying, THANK YOU! I have been saying for YEARS that humans did NOT evolve from apes. If that was the case then why didn’t ALL apes evolve?

  • pdullea

    I hear they had red hair!!

    • Rich_Zellich

      Interesting thought. I wondered about that…did they have red hair and elongated skulls? Did they migrate West, perhaps along the Gulf Coast, and then South through Mexico and Central America into Peru? If so, when and where did they develop the massive stone-working skills manifested in Peru and Southward? Nothing like that in the Southeast US (unless the evidence is underwater off the East Coast).

      • Christiane Schroll

        There were many that had blonde hair like the early Germanic peoples. I live in Pennsylvania and depictions of the native tribes in my state display some really strong Germanic features. Especially the noses.

  • Super Marsupial

    Get off my land!

  • slippery jim

    were they jews?

    • Günter Stellmaszek

      You are right, but the spelling did not exists in those day, it would slowly tranform.It what we have in our legacies as “Ogre”, which became “Gog”.Look for the skull caps in England in the “Cave of Gough”, spelling transformed further and later them would be called Geoff,Gorge,George,(Ogre).Geoffrey,Jeffrey,Jewfrei,Jew,Jeff,Chef,JeffersonThem were in the Russian steppe called the Huns…those George,Georgi,Yuri,Gjurgi was the root for Aryan Warg,Varka,Worg, the Aryan speling for the wolf which them worshipped.Them fixatied in the medieval times their spellings, using the slavic root “Yefrei”,”Yevrey”, unknown to western Europe, to wrote their other identities out of history.

      • Chicago_Joe_GG

        I”d like to know more about what you’re saying.

        Do you have any links with more info? I don’t quite understand you.

        • jabowery

          What my esteemed colleague Günter Stellmaszek failed to point out, however, was that these First Tribes in the New World had descended from what we now know as the “Yeti”, the cognate of which has become “Yentl” thus demonstrating that not only were the First Americans Jews, but that Jews were originally abominable snowmen into cross dressing.

        • Eliza Bulla

          I think he’s saying the Jews did exist but they were called Ogres at the time. Ogre=>Gog=>Gough=>Geoff=>Gorge=>George=>Geoffrey=> Jeffrey=>Jewfrei=>Jew. We don’t recognize the people in the Russian steppe at the time as being Jewish because they fixated the spelling in the slavic root “Yefrei”,”Yevrey” instead of “Jewfrie” We call them Huns.

    • Lol

    • Clayton Thomas

      Are you Mormon?

    • The Truthinator

      lmfao Jews did not exist during that time. Try again.

  • John William

    So what happened to those people? Did their civilization develop into what we think of as Native Americans or did the tribes the early colonists encountered wipe out the original Indo-European peoples?

    If its the former, then the whole “racism” thing is kind of garbage since we’re the same race. (Of course, humans are all the same race but don’t tell progressives that. It threatens their source of money and power. Shhh….)

    And if its the latter…well…then it looks like Anglo-American civilization is the one that truly has the right to this territory, right? The whole “we were here first” argument…

    Liberal heads exploding in 3…2…1…

    • Saffa Coza

      They were conquered and assimilated by the Asians (American indians) who arrived later from Russia – their genetic haplogroup has been picked up in some native american indian tribes.
      Native Americans are not as innocent and pure as libs wouldhave youbelieve. There was a civilisation in the four corners area which had dwellings up to five stories high which were decimated by “native” american tribes…

      • slippery jim

        what an asswipe thing to say.

        • Adam Hartman

          Well, it’s true. It’s not a bad thing to say. No culture is innocent. Everyone pretty much made war on everyone else. So what?

      • John William

        Oh, of course not. The question was largely rhetorical since I have heard both theories: that they were destroyed and that they were assimilated. It was more meant to provoke thought in the liberal readers.

        I know. I know. That’s kind of like trying to provoke compassion from a zombie but credit for effort, right?

        • Gyabou

          Nobody says they were “innocent”. They say, truthfully, that their land was stolen, their culture was destroyed, and their people murdered and oppressed by European colonists. You can twist yourself up into whatever kind of ridiculous denial pretzel you want, that is what happened and there is no way around it. Native people being warlike just like every other race of people on the planet does not mean that it was okay that they were wiped out by white people.

          Also, if these findings have a basis that doesn’t mean that “Europeans were here first and therefore colonization was okay”. Hey if a bunch of French people invade England and murder and colonize is that okay? Because the Gauls lived in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons, the Normans, and the Vikings successively colonized it.

          • neurocorsair

            It looks like they stole the land first, bro.

            Every inch of soil on this planet has a history of conquest and bloodshed behind it. What the Europeans did in the Americas is no different.

          • Gyabou

            Hey Pepe, you’re not very smart, are you? It doesn’t matter that it’s “no different”. This isn’t a contest. The possibility that the ancestors of native peoples encountered a pre-existing resident and conquered their land (ALL speculation – they may have also intermarried; for decades everyone said Neanderthals were wiped out by Homo sapiens too but the frequency of Neanderthal DNA in modern day Europeana points instead to interbreeding), the fact remains that those people had been living in America for thousands of years, had civilizations and cultures, and colonists in North and South America destroyed them. It’s ignorant in the extreme to suggest that this doesn’t matter, especially based on some very tenuous evidence. We don’t have to rely on archaeological theories to know exactly what happened in the Americas starting 500 years ago. There’s plenty of textual evidence. But you’d rather grasp at straws to somehow justify it. Give me a break. You are weak.

          • neurocorsair

            LOL! I’m weak? I’m not the one fanny flustered on the internet over something that happened hundreds of years ago now, whereas current natives have gotten decades worth of gibsmedat because of it.

            I’m also not the one threatened by something in ancient prehistory that disrupts my narrative.

            The continent is better from what the Europeans brought here. That’s all I care about.

          • Jim Oberg

            They just kept more honest records.

          • Aldous Huxley

            “What the Europeans did in the Americas is no different.”

            –so two wrong make a right? what’s your point?

          • haha, listen to you! Claiming others dont have a point!

          • John William

            Part Two:

            Even the Vikings–no strangers to savagery themselves–who were, actually, the first modern Europeans to make it to these shores didn’t stay long. The Vikings who early on came to North America departed or were killed and those that fled returned with tales of the “Screaming Men”–natives of the land across the sea who fought like lunatics and could not be reasoned or negotiated with. Since there was plenty of land to fight over in northern Europe, the
            Vikings figured if they had to fight for it, why go all the way over there to do so? In fact, the first race war in the history of this continent was King Philip’s War in 1675: a bloody affair that was started by a paranoid earth-worshiping nut-case who claimed the “Great Spirit” told him the *white* man was going to take over everything and destroy their primitive culture. Fear-mongering, race-hustling tribalist–wow, these people have a lot in common with modern liberals.

            The news of this highly publicized event spread like wildfire through the colonies sparking anti-native resentment that led to raised tensions in an already tense situation. For the next hundred years the natives continued to build upon their reputation as savages both in their personal wars and in their eagerness to make war upon the colonists at the behest of the French. Of course, unless you think the natives were grotesquely stupid–you racist–they knew exactly what they were doing, for whom and why. They were mercenaries and they joined the wrong side. This aggression culminated in the French and Indian War in which the Indians lost. And to the victor go the spoils.

          • John William

            Part Three:

            Then, when the Revolution broke out, the natives again chose a side–those peaceful natives just don’t seem to be able to keep their noses out of other people’s business. Hm. Again, kind of like liberals: no wonder you all get along so
            well. And, of course, actual students of history know that the side they chose was the side of the tyrants in Great Britain and the natives lost. Once again, to the victor…

            What followed was a convoluted series of agreements and broken promises–on BOTH sides–but by this time the reputation of the natives as little more than present-day barbarians was firmly entrenched and…well…we had boom sticks. While this does not excuse the–rare and notable (there’s that phrase again)–abuses the natives suffered at the hands of the Americans, it does throw into vivid context how the people of the day, largely good and moral
            people, could excuse those abuses in their own mind. The natives would not have peace and things like the Trail of Tears, while regrettable, were preferable to the war that would surely follow otherwise. While we have the benefit of a broad-spectrum view 150 years later, 19th century Americans were not so blessed, so the pseudo-intellectual sophistry and unearned moral superiority of the small-minded mutants currently populating the ranks of academia can kindly trickle out the buzz of a distant mosquito.

          • John William

            Part Four:

            Giving any amount of respect to the native cultures of North America necessitates that we acknowledge that they were 1) Intelligent enough to know and understand what they were doing; 2) Responsible enough to be held accountable for their actions and their poor choices and 3) warrior cultures who were honorably defeated on the field of battle by a superior warrior culture. By ANY standard of history,
            that series of well-documented historical facts easily gives legal and, yes, MORAL claim to the land. YOU twist yourself up into “denial pretzels” if you want, but THAT is what happened and there are those of us left in the world that are not so self-loathing that we lament proving to be the superior culture. There are those of us that view war as a horribly regrettable but otherwise honest contest when negotiation cannot resolve differences. And, when
            pitted in honest battle, we do not fault the victors for achieving victory especially when failure would have resulted not only in far worse abuses perpetrated upon our people than we ever *envisioned* subjecting them to but
            would also have fundamentally altered the course of history snuffing out the one tiny flame of liberty that America
            has ever been…up to that point at least.

          • John William

            Part Five:

            This fact, that the Indo-Europeans were actually the first to arrive, merely takes the last pitiable objection of the historical revisionists and silences it. The last whimpering gasp of “but they were here first” can now be swept
            into the dust bin of history and we can look with honesty upon all that transpired. We can regret with clear hearts the abuses at our hands, learn from them and be a better people for honest examination. We can admire certain aspects of the rich tapestry of native culture even immortalizing elements of their warrior spirit in our own military today—a greater respect that has never been paid to a defeated enemy. Ultimately, though, we do not lament that we proved to be the victor in our contest. When one considers the great cultural, economic and technological advantages we enjoyed over our enemies the fact that there ARE any natives left is testament enough to the moral restraint inherent in America’s civilization for had any other nation—including both the natives and the vaunted Europeans—in the history of the world enjoyed that kind of military advantage over their enemies they would have brushed the natives aside with barely a thought and planted their flag wherever they pleased. The efforts to respect and preserve tribal sovereignty, however badly those efforts failed, are so far above the norm of human history that I think I can sleep soundly no matter how loudly the self-loathing lamentations echo in the ivory towers of the inbred elitists. When one considers as well that America, the world and—yes—even the Native Americans are FAR better off than they would have been had our roles been reversed, I resent the efforts to lay still more “white guilt” upon my
            shoulders as though the natives did not contribute materially to their own downfall and as though my ancestors would, by and large, been completely
            disinterested in war had the natives carried a similar philosophy of peace.

            You accept the racist revision of history if you think it helps you gain some sense of moral superiority that would otherwise be completely out of your reach. For the rest of us, we take an honest view of history because, at the
            end of the day, it doesn’t matter how you feel about it. What matters is what you can learn from it. And you can’t learn anything from lies.

          • lonenors3man

            Proto-Indo Europeans: a theoretical cultural language group existing approx 4000 b.c.e. to 1000 b.c.e.

            Early primitive copper age, likely from the steppe.

            PIE did not exist nor had they conquered western Europe 14,000 years ago, please get your facts straight.

      • hereinWA

        Actually, our DNA is not Asian by any means.

        • Saffa Coza

          Native American DNA has four groups, One being X which is apparently from these ancient Solutreans.

      • Sherrie Quinton Hall

        Fascinating, where in the four corners area?

    • hippecampre

      Never forget the Soultrean genocide by their greater numbered Asiatic domineers.

      • Normandie Kent

        Lol! Solutrians were not seafaring people but terrestrial mammoth hunters, who never even ventured to exploit sea life, but were hunter gatherers. They painted land animals only. Nothing from the sea, how could they of been genocided by native americans when they were nowhere near North America? The only people in America,who were genocided where the native americans themselves, by the descendants of the solutrians themselves, that didn’t get to America till 400 years ago.

    • Jon Rich

      No, “France and northern Spain” isn’t “Anglo” in any sense of the word, and the Angles and Saxons didn’t arrive in England until about 1,500 years ago, anyways.

    • they were bred out of expression, their genes are still there but they aren’t expressed. Look up Haplogroup X and Haplogroup R-m173, both are caucasian/white haplogroups and both date from 25,000-10,000 bce and both are found in north america in the exact same areas.

      • Normandie Kent

        Native American x2a and middle eastern x is not closly related. But is related to the x haplogroups found in the Altaic region of Mongolia . Y dna R-m173 is not an indigenous haplogroup. They have not found it in any ancient remains past 500yrs ago at wthe time of conquest

    • A comet struck the Laurentide ice sheet, triggering the massive release of cold fresh water from Lake Agassiz into the North Atlantic, disrupting ocean currents and plunging north America and Europe into a renewed era of ice age called the Younger Dryas. The Clovis people were wiped out, opening the continent to colonization by asians.

      • Normandie Kent

        Native americans are the direct descendant of the preclovis and the Clovis people. Anzick 1 child 12,500 yrs. old, Native American genome of a 1 year old boy. Study by dr Eske Willeslev 2014. Peer reviewed

        • That child was found in Montana, far away from Clovis territory. There were mixed siberian and clovis points at the campsite, all that proves is that siberians and clovis people traded with each other in the west. It still doesn’t explain why clovis culture on the east coast of US predates siberian culture on the west coast.

    • Gilchrist

      They were massacred by the Ewoks the Vikings and Pilgrims found here.

    • The Truthinator

      Due to the type of weather on the East coast during that time along with the Asians who crossed the land bridge, they were wiped out. People tend to forget there was a glacier covering half this continent.

      And no, humans are not of the same race you dull wit. Most people are even different humanoid species such as Caucasians coming from Cro Magnon and Africans coming from Homo Erectus.

      • John William

        Try again. The Human Genome Project found that there are no discernible differences within the genetic structures of any “race.”

        Ah…evolution. Excusing racism since 1859.

    • Mike Smith

      I don’t think the point of this article was to be political. Some people gotta make everything political. Take it for what it is, a groundbreaking archaeological study, that rewrites ice-age history of humans in the new world.

  • Epiminondas

    Well, this must be very disturbing for self-loathing white liberals. Columbus now has to be seen as the European Reconquista.

  • Lloyd Welch

    Ancient DNA. LOL

  • gatorallin

    I hope they can follow up this with some dna tracing back to show European links to prove this theory. Can they trace the bones they find at these older sites to back it up?

    • Jody Dayton Peace

      that has already been done…

    • Eddy Clarysse

      anciant dna has proven this whole theory incorrect

      • Saffa Coza

        Lair. Their DNA has been found in certain tribes as the x haplogroup.

        • gatorallin

          Love to learn more… can you post up some links on the research done to help confirm these theories? Thanks!

      • no dna has proven this theory correct, kennwick man carried a white x haplogroup group(haplogroup x2a) and an asian y haplogroup, haplogroup x2a also has the same distribution as white european haplogroup r-m173 in the americas. It’s absolutely undeniable that a homogenous white population was the founding population of north american indians before they were subject to genocide at the hands of amerindians in 10,000 bce, these same amerindians also invaded europe and became the Sami people.

    • look up haplogroup X and haplogroup R-m173, they are white haplogroups, both found among native americans and found in the same regions of the americas, there’s your genetic evidence.

  • Wgates

    This book explains in detail how the earliest humans arrived in the Americas. I made my local library buy it. Read and understand the last 30 years of research by actual professionals. There now appear to be three groups of people who made it here before the Danish Vikings and Columbus…the Selureans from Spain and SW France, the SE Asians by boat ( maybe not the Siberians ) and the Pacific Islanders who came across the S. Pacific to Chile. These scientists did not speculate about the S. Sea Islanders. They do not have evidence. Read for yourselves the linguistic and physical evidence. Great work from real scientists on the Atlantic Ice Crossing. What were we thinking before ????  Make YOUR library buy the book and extenf the realm of science in America.

  • i believe we were here before the breakup of pangea?

    • Mike Woolley

      Pangea formed about 300 million years ago. It broke apart in stages from 200 to about 170 million years ago. This is eons before the most optimistic estimate of the arrival of humans, anywhere at all.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *