What were the first settlers that came to America after the native? was there anyone that beat Columbus? And who were
There were the Na-Dene and Inuit migrations into America from Siberia.
Polynesian contact along the South American coast.
The Norse briefly tried to settle in the north but the harsh weather, hostile natives, and general lack of draw/interest made them abandon it.
There's some evidence the Basques might have reached around Newfoundland chasing new fishing and whaling grounds, but there's nothing definitive.
Anything outside of this is complete speculation without any real evidence and is usually /x/-tier
There's a pretty interesting map series on alternatehistory.com based on that
which indicates that they were there. before the mongoloid crossing.
Actually, no. Deleted that post because:
>A 2014 genetic analysis published in the journal Nature reported that the DNA from a 24,000-year-old skeleton excavated in Central Siberia provided mitochondrial, Y chromosomal, and autosomal genetic evidence that suggests 14 to 38% of Native American ancestry originates from an ancient Western Eurasian population. The Mal'ta era skeleton's mitochondrial genome belonged to mtDNA haplogroup U, which has also been found at high frequencies among Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers. The authors state that their findings have four implications, the third being that "such an easterly presence in Asia of a population related to contemporary western Eurasians provides a possibility that non-east Asian cranial characteristics of the First Americans derived from the Old World via migration through Beringia, rather than by a trans-Atlantic voyage from Iberia as proposed by the Solutrean hypothesis." 
>Mal'ta boy had YDNA haplogroup R1* which is common to both Europeans and Native Americans. Haplogroup R1 (Y-DNA)) is the second most predominant Y haplotype found among indigenous Amerindians after Q (Y-DNA). The distribution of R1 is believed to be associated with the re-settlement of Eurasia following the last glacial maximum. One theory put forth is that it entered the Americas with the initial founding population. A second theory is that it was introduced during European colonization. R1 is very common throughout all of Eurasia except East Asia and Southeast Asia. R1 (M173) is found predominantly in North American groups like the Ojibwe (79%), Chipewyan (62%), Seminole (50%), Cherokee (47%), Dogrib (40%) and Tohono O'odham (Papago) (38%).
In 2014, the autosomal DNA of a 12,500+-year-old infant from Montana was sequenced. The DNA was taken from a skeleton referred to as Anzick-1, found in close association with several Clovis artifacts. Comparisons showed strong affinities with DNA from Siberian sites, and the report stated that "In agreement with previous archaeological and genetic studies our genome analysis refutes the possibility that Clovis originated via a European (Solutrean) migration to the Americas." The DNA also showed strong affinities with all existing Native American populations, which indicated that all of them derive from an ancient population that lived in or near Siberia, the Upper Palaeolithic Mal'ta population. Anzick-1 Y-haplogroup is Q.
That distribution is from the first three or more waves of American migration coming from Siberia and central Asia. It's because the Western Euros and some of the Indians are both descended from this line, so they're more like cousins, not one descending from the other.
Yes, the same Norse that settled Greenland and also later abandoned it. The mini ice age was starting and it made both Vinland and Greenland impossible for them to survive in with their ways of life.
>all the retards that try to appeal to the arbitrary limit between what is and what isn't a native american
>humans have continuously for thousands of years come in different periods and groups from various sources since they have been able to
They didn't adapt their culture to that specific environment
In the long term the Inuit's mode of survival in the frozen north was an impediment to the Inuit ability to expand outside of the arctic, while sedentary nations that relied on farming (or animal herding in the case of the Bantu) eventually had massive populations that allowed for mass colonization of weaker, less numerous peoples
Start understanding what a haplogroup is first.
All that the haplogroup tracks is geographical distribution and inter-relatedness of populations, and /nothing else/. We use them because they don't code for anything, this is why they are a useful way to track the relationship between populations and geography, and that is why charts made using them always resemble maps where their locations are marked.
Coding DNA spreads through the population so long as it is adaptive, and there have never been large human populations that were completely isolated from the other large human populations.
Like I say, the Norse could not adapt to the environment, the Inuit could. Why would the Inuit want to develop a way of life that was worse for their current situation?
Bantu farmed as well as herded. A minority of Africans were without farming as of 1500 AD.
Some people on /pol/ think that they are the descendants of people who used to rule the Americas but were displaced by modern native Americans.
Even if this were the correct interpretation of the data (it isn't), I don't see what bearing it would have on the morality of displacing native Americans over the last few hundred years.
There are more Scandinavians.
So you think Inuit should have changed their lifestyle so that they were less able to survive in the Arctic, so that one day they might be able to do better somewhere else?
Some people believe that the Sahara or the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans are hermetic seals to human movement. They aren't. Useful alleles spread across these before the modern era.
Beginning with Moses, he said Pharaoh let my people go. What they don't say is where did he go? But he married into a Canaanite. Those who split the middle sea in two. The mediterranean. They establish a kingdom of great power in the middle sea, with hundreds if not tens of thousands of ports in 3 continents.
Spain is the westernmost country in Europe.
I believe they were the Phoenicians, with ports in the Atlantic. The Greeks were said to call them the Atlanteans. A civilization much more advanced than their own.
Native Americans of Caribbean and South America say they descend from a warring sea tribe that came over and traded thousands of years back.
Dome Native Americans of Chile. Say they descend from Polynesians that sailed there by making stops in smaller islands. Traveling long distances.
The most useful tale is this. Follow the coconut. If a coconut could have gotten there people could have made it there as well. Nobody knows exactly where the coconut really originated or at what time it got there. They just suppose it originated in South East Asia.
The Inuit lived further north, and in any case weren't yet present in the eastern Arctic at the time. The Norse settled in northern Newfoundland and encountered the so-called Beothuks, who were 'red indians', almost certainly an Algonquian people. Most closely related to either Mikmaqs or Innu (a Cree-speaking group and NOT related to Inuit).
I've been to L'anse aux Meadow. It was windy and rainy as fuck, but it is not Arctic by any means, nor was it in the 11th century.