nnifer Raff, a University of Kansas assistant professor of anthropology, said mitochondrial and genomic data that scientists have recovered don't support such an early wave of migrants.
"That hypothesis is only held by a very tiny minority of the archaeological community, but nevertheless it gets a lot of attention from people who have a casual interest in American archaeology," said Raff, lead author of a recent article in the journal PaleoAmerica on the issue. "When we summarize the genetic results we have, we find nothing that's consistent with these hypothesized trans-Atlantic migrations."
Raff and co-author Deborah Bolnick, associate professor of anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin, published the article that evaluated these hypotheses in light of current genetic evidence from ancient and present-day Native Americans. They concluded that genetic data scientists have recovered to date only supports a migration from Siberia into the Americas and does not show evidence of earlier migrations from ancient Israelites or inhabitants of what is now Europe. Within the next month, the journal article will available to the public via open access, Raff said.
The genetic piece of one recent argument for a trans-Atlantic migration—known as the Solutrean hypothesis—contended that the presence of mitochondrial haplogroup X2a in Native American populations provided evidence for ancient gene flow from Europe or the Middle East into North America. The hypothesis suggested that the North American Clovis culture dated roughly 13,000 years ago was directly descended from the Solutrean culture of southwestern Europe dated roughly 23,000 years before present.
Eurocentrists btfo yet again
The Solutrean theory? That was and is believed by many very educated archaeologists and anthropologists.
This article is deceitful in that in compared the ancient Israelite concept to the Solutrean Theory.
>8,500-year-old Kennewick Man
>no indication of recent European ancestry
recent Europeans probably don't fit the same genetic profile as their 23,000 year old ancestors either
the body is over 5000 years younger than the hypothesized migration
>Proponents of an early trans-Atlantic migration typically point to a similarity in the tools used by Clovis people—ancient Native Americans—with the early Solutrean hunter-gatherer people in Europe, Raff said.
>most anthropologists and archaeologists consider that a coincidence
>talks about Euro-centrism
It's clear someone has an agenda here.
Honestly I'd like to see a proper analysis of the study before jumping to conclusions. I don't trust "pop-sci" publications at all.
I honestly don't particularly care whether or not the Native Americans have Solutrean admixture, but I do care about the truth and I know that pop-sci publications ~very~ often distort the truth.
During the last ice age, the Atlantic ice shelf stretched from Southern France to the east coast of North America.
Given that the same stone tools are found on both sides of this shelf during the same period, it is hypothesized that ancient European hunting groups could have followed migrating seal populations to the North American continent and settled there only to be displaced or eradicated by the Asian migrations later.
I mean, if the Polynesians could settle the entire Pacific and Easter Island in fucking canoes, it's not impossible for European groups to do something even easier by comparison.
>It's clear someone has an agenda here.
muh victim complex, if this was debunking the native african theory you'd be dancing and the street while screaming 'AFROCENTRISTS BTFO, WE WUZ INJUNS!!'
Lipan Apaches were fucking cocks iirc.
They had designated raiding grounds, where, whatever/whoever was on that land at a certain season would be massacred without resolve. The Spanish and Mexicans bought them off with beads and trinkets and shit every year so they wouldn't kill all their Texan/Couhuilan(wrong spelling) settlers at the trading posts/missions. Come Mexico being fucking retarded and having internal disputes, they couldn't give anymore trinkets. this left the settlers open to raids and scalping and death and kidnappings!
There were more than one Apache tribe anyway, but eventually the Lipan Apache all died out anyway and the Comanche took their place and did pretty much the same shit
yeah it blew my mind when i learned shit like sickle cell anemia evolved independently outside of africa
they study the various genetic routes taken to reach these same end points and they can be vastly different but result in the same phenotype
I find it strange how common it is to compare modern populations to ancient ones, as if it proves anything. Ancient European hunter-gatherers contributed a very small amount to the genetic component of modern European populations. They might as well be using modern New Englanders as stand-ins for the indigenous American hunter-gatherers. At least, that's the impression I got from the article, but I've seen the approach elsewhere.
Why would a genetic contribution be necessary, though? Assuming a small influx along the ice-sheet, I would be surprised to see any great population shift. Would a large-scale intrusion be necessary for cultural diffusion of a knapping technique?
Someone in a thread on American Indian DNA the other day was saying something about the R1b in eastern North American natives being reanalyzed and found not to be R1b1a2a (the main Western European lineage), but I couldn't get a link out of them. Anybody know about this?