How We Left the Bering Land Bridge Theory and What We Think Now Pt 2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 พ.ค. 2024
- Here we wrap up our tale regarding the history of Western thought about Indigenous American origins. The Land Bridge Theory is what most Americans alive today were taught in school, but hasn't been the leading academic theory for almost 2 decades. Watch to learn why and what we do think now.
Pt 1- • The Story of The Berin...
If you like my content and want to help the channel thrive, consider supporting me on Patreon!
/ indigenoushistorynow
Links to other videos referenced
Were People really in North America 30,000 years ago?: The Chiquihuite Cave site by Nathanael Fosaaen-
• Were People really in ...
The research for this video is heavily indebted to my 2 main sources
The First Americans: In Pursuit of Archaeology's Greatest Mystery
-JM Adovasio and Jake Page
1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus
-Charles C Mann
Timestamps
00:00 Summary of Clovis 1st
03:02 Bluefish Caves
06:45 Language, genes, and teeth paper
10:57 Intro to genetics
13:12 Indigenous genetics
16:43 Meadowcroft Rockshelter
21:30 Monte Verde
27:42 The Ice Free Corridor
29:40 The Overkill Hypothesis
31:55 Other pre-Clovis sites
34:44 Sea Route Theory
36:52 Austronesian route
40:24 Racist theorizing
42:30 Kennewick Man
46:17 Weird haplogroups
48:40 the Solutrean Hypothesis
52:47 Analysis and conclusion
I had my expectations very high and you didn't disappoint. Your breakdown of the alternative theories was excellent!
Fancy seeing you here!
@@NathanaelFosaaen well howdy!
Who is "we," in this video title? Is this video intended to be watched by indigenous people? Is this channel intended for indigenous people? Is this suppose to celebrate indigenous history? Is this honoring indigenous history? is this uplifting indigenous history?
@ancientamericas I'm kind of confused about this channel maybe you can help? @NathanaelFosaaen you twoo? I'm enrolled with the Puyallup Tribe. With the imagery, and name of this channel. Who is "we" in the video title? I thought the channel might be about uplifting native culture and heritage . . . but if we check the about page . . ."Welcome to Indigenous History Now! On this channel we discuss the rich history of America's indigenous peoples from ancient eras all the way to the present day. The channel will progress roughly chronologically and focuses primarily on indigenous peoples in the lands of the modern United States." sssssooooo I guess I'm just an ash hole bc its clearly states, that they are here to set the record straight about Indians. . . right now even!!! . . did you guys notice or care that this channels creator spent multiply hours going over land bridge theory. . . and spent less than 40 in total covering 8 Indian creation stories. . . that's like not even five minutes each. Who's rich history was that again? or which rich history might referenced here? I guess maybe the question is ? Does this channel represent critical race theory? neo colonialism? post modernism? Maybe the channel name should be Indian History Now! . . . as America signed treaties with Indians and not indigenous. . . my "tribal," card say Puyallup Tribe of Indians . . . ? ? ? ? maybe just a thought. . . good coverage. nice imagery. really capturing the indianness. I can feel it! all you guys do a really great job though!
@Dead Woof in this context I'm pretty sure "we" is human beings. But I didn't make the video so I can't be sure.
I'm only going to throw one flag on the field. My understanding of reading David Reich's work on ancient Native American DNA suggests the Australasian DNA evidence is not Polynesian (he clearly states it is not Polynesian in his findings), but related more closely to Australian/New Guinea indigenous DNA. I'm not a geneticist at all, but it was pretty clear when reading it. I don't have answers for it being there, and neither does Reich, but I think it's important to be accurate about what it is they do and don't see in the Amazon basin DNA. I'm not willing to dismiss it myself, but instead note it as an interesting and currently unexplained data point. Maybe someday a piece of evidence will emerge that can help explain it better. Maybe not.
Catch up Dude! It's been known for a while that the Aboriginals of Australia r NOT from Africa, the DNA studies have been done and they are from ASIA. Eurasia, Polynesia, Oceana to be exact. The Negritos from the Philippines r also not from Africa niether r the ppl from Papua New Guinea. It's been known for a long time that diet and environment can dictate ur physical appearance, including hair texture and skin color. Had to be that way on every continent. Same DNA but looked different depending on where they lived and diet. Seems like the features that ppl think r unique to Black Africans, r not, neither r the features we think r unique to Caucasian and Asian, ect. Don't know why it isn't more mainstream, probably bc, the USA has been shoving Africa up everyone's ass for a long time, especially up the Natives and Méxicans, (who r native), ass! It's no mystery, the so called "experts" know the Aboriginals of Australia r from Asia and they came with the rest of us in the waves of humanity to the Americas. They eventually went to Australia, where they had already started to go from ASIA!! The oldest mummies in the world, r in the Americas, Peru, not Egypt, the biggest pyramid in the world, is in the Americas, Mexico, not Egypt. The oldest mummies in Egypt have Asian DNA, not African or Egyptian. The "experts" especially from USA, stooped really low with an evil political agenda, or hated us on sight and still do. Even with all this info, they have based their career on demeaning the Americas Natives and the Americas, and making us look and feel like the bastards of the earth. The Americas r as old as the earth! It's very possible that they could have influenced other cultures.
Seriously though this is a great video. As an indigenous person whose always been fascinated by anthropology and archaeology, I always have to approach studies/articles/etc. from the perspective of filtering out racism, no matter intentional or not. It's baked into many aspects of science, as we are realizing more and more every day. Your channel was recommended to me by a friend and I always step with caution when interacting with indigenous history stuff online, because you never know what their experience with indigenous people is. Your honesty about the very insidiously racist theories is refreshing.
Often you hear Indigenous people say "we've been here since time immemorial". Scientists from many fields like to discredit this with facts about Clovis, pre-clovis, the coastal migration theory, what have you. It doesn't mean humanity is from the Americas, and I while I can't speak for all indigenous people obviously, that's obviously untrue. It just means we've been here longer than human memory, and every time an older and older site appears, we just stand in the corner with our arms crossed saying "we told you so". All this to say, thank you for acknowledging that.
Can't wait to see the rest of your channel. Can't believe this doesn't have more views! It will soon, I can feel it!
The 37,000 yr old processed Mammoth site from New Mexico really eliminates most theories because they simply don’t go back that far.
There may be information on another site in So Cal, few years ago. Mammoth bones butchered. Discovered while building a road.
Cannot recall all details now. Probably on TH-cam.
That is the Cerruti mastodon site. It is possibly 130kya. That would make Homo Erectus the indigenous people.
@@greymatter6834
Cerutti site? By CA route 54 near the freeway?
Me, opening the champagne bottle at a family gathering: i promise i wont get political
me, two glasses later: clovis-first is BULLSH-
The amount of rants my girlfriend was subject to while I was doing the research for this video😅😅
42:11, If the solutrans are western hunter-gatherers they were also wiped out* from Europe by later population waves. *either through confrontation, assimilation, competitive disadvantage or, I imagine more likely, a complex interplay of the three alternatives.
You have done some superb work in these two videos and I was very pleased with the result. Please keep up the amazing work. My only quibble with this part 2 is that I feel like you may refer to the ice-free corridor theory as the "Asian land bridge theory" which might confuse some audiences into thinking the idea of migration via Beringia has been discredited (it has definitely not). I would urge a little bit of caution on this point. The ice free corridor theory is a theory put forward by the Clovis-first people to explain how people got from Alaska/Beringia to the rest of America at precisely the time of Clovis given the assumption that they must have been too primitive to have seafaring technology; but the theory never really attempted to address how or when people left Asia (although it was implied they walked inland since they allegedly didn't have seafaring skills).
I think you have done an exceptional job of covering all the reasons why the ice free corridor theory and the Clovis first theory are both totally discredited, by the way.
But as far as I know there is no "land bridge theory" even if there were, it would presumably be a theory for how and when people left Asia; debunking the ice free corridor theory would not necessarily debunk any such theory.
It is pretty well established that the Americans came from Asia. It is also established that Asia and North America were once a single connected land mass with a vast lowland region now submerged called Beringia that is entirely inaccessible to archeology today. The only questions are (a) by what means did Americans move from Asia to America and (b) in what time frame(s) and (c) how many waves. We know that they came in at least three waves (the Aleut settlement of the Arctic most recently, the Na-Dene arrival before that, and then at least one - possibly more - waves that are VERY ancient from which most Americans descended. We also know with very high confidence that the earliest arrivals came many thousands of years - possibly 10s of thousands of years - earlier than the Clovis first people are willing to admit.
Beyond that, while there is no reason to deny that ancient migrants had basic seafaring technology, and it would explain a lot of things (like how Americans could have moved quickly all the way to the southernmost reaches of South America from Northwestern America so quickly: very achievable if the earliest Americans were migrating with the aid of seafaring technology), hard evidence is mostly still unobtainable because of the rise of sea levels since the time of migration: any coastal archeological sites are now underwater.
But my issue with using the phrase "land bridge theory" is that having seafaring technology and following the "kelp highway" all the way from Beringia to Chile 25k-20k years ago does not mean people didn't move from Asia to Beringia exclusively by boat or by "island hopping" as you mention. Keep in mind, most what are now islands in the Bering Sea were all once connected mountains on mainland Beringia. Beringia itself was probably never covered by ice, and considering the Pacific and the Arctic were not in contact, the water temps on the coast of Beringia might even have been warmer than today, despite the ice age, making Beringia probably a very hospitable place, rich in both marine and coastal forest resources; not so much "island hopping" as following the coastline of a land bridge. Beringia's probable wealth of natural resources for human settlement also lends support to another quirk some geneticists have tried to explain as the "Beringia interlude" theory: American DNA seems to begin to diversify and split up much more recently than it appears to have broken off from Asian DNA. The first Americans seem to have held together as a group disconnected from Asia but well connected between themselves for many thousands of years before splitting up. Although it is not the only explanation, the idea that Beringia was a great place to call home for a long time before deciding to follow the kelp forests southward into the Americas is one possibility. I think you touch upon all of this quite fairly and professionally as the current state of affairs. The work you have done is great. This comment is all merely to caution against suggesting that theories hypothesizing passage from Asia to a lowland coastal forest land mass called Beringia that is now submerged - or along its coastline - 20-30k years ago are not the theories that have been debunked in the last 10 years, but rather it is the ice free corridor theory and Clovis first theory that have been debunked; calling those debunked theories the "land bridge" theory might confuse some audiences to misunderstand that people didn't come from Asia to America via Beringia or along its coastline; the "land bridge" called Beringia was a very real geographic reality 25,000 years ago. perhaps a better term for the debunked theory would be an "inland foot passage" theory?
Well see. Thats just it. They are only theories, like the land bridge theory.
I wonder if anyone has done a comparison between the mythology and theories being invented to justify colonization in the Americas with that of modern Israel. While there is a big difference (1000s of years ago there were Jewish peoples living in modern Israel and Palestine) much of what the modern Israeli state insists as their foundation narrative is very familiar: the land was largely unoccupied, undeveloped, and unused (it was "a land without a people"), the people willingly gave it up (just like treaties the US had with Indians), etc. I wonder if it's similar to South Africa as well. There has to be some common themes for colonizer mythology when justifying themselves.
I don't know about South Africa, but I've heard this argument used in the colonial expansion of Rhodes through what is now Zimbabwe and Zambia.
The first form of the Bible was written in 325BC, 80 years before the Antikythera mechanism, and was called the Vaticanus Graecus, Son of the Divine Serpent, a reference to Fomalhaut, which is shaped like the all seeing eye, in Aquarius, the sign associated with John the Baptist, who was a Setian, the root word of Satan. Just as israel is the Phoenician word for Saturn, or El, Fruit of Isis and Ra.
In the Second Century AD Astrologer Vettori Valentinus used the Vaticanus Graecus to construct a lunar zodiac of 13 months, this correlates to the 18.6/ 19 year Metonic Calendar, found in the earliest known ancient temples, the Bible, Antikythera mechanism, New Grange and the Bru na Boinne, the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Assyrians, Celts, Phoenicians, and inscribed into the Golden Enoch Horns of the Magi, the Eunuch Druid Priests of Cybel, or Kythera, the "Great Mother", (who also has 216 names) in Germany and France. A Druid took 19 years to train, and the Phoenix was associated with 19 flames.
TLDR; the ancient metric system of time used by the builders of the Megalithic sites all over the world directly correlates to the Astrological Zodiac and allows for the surveying of the entire globe.
It's worth noting our current system has 8,640 seconds in a day, just as the sun is 864,000 miles wide. Enoch also wrote 36,525 scrolls, which is 365.25 times 100, the Egyptian number of perfection, which allowed them to calculate things to the second decimal place. The Great Pyramid is a Calendar, based on the Metonic Cycle and the Zodiac, hence the association of Osiris with Orion, and Pleiades Isis, atop the back of Taurus, just as the Phoenician Princess Europa, who rode the Bull. The entire Mediterranean region was also mapped out according to key constellations, marked by these Megalithic structures, which themselves encode these numbers
Other names for Isis include Semiramus, Aphrodite, Europa, Kythera, Cybele, and Cylene.
The Byblos Baal, or Book of Baal is the Phoenician Almanac, a coded book of Astrological cycles used by the Priest Class of Egypt; the Phoenicians, to navigate the oceans. Phoenicians, Celts, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Egyptians and Jews all celebrated their New Year in September, the 7th month, the Sunsign of Ophiuchus, the Serpent Bearer, associated with the healing Gods, and marked by the first New Moon in the 7th month after the start of the Zodiac in Easter, when Ophiuchus is the East Star. In September the East star is Orion, aka Osiris, aka Set, Lord of the Dead. Hence the Aleph, and the Zayim, Alpha and Omega. It's also the Birthday of Jesus, and when he said he would return, at the end of the Age. It's reversed to keep the code secret, and written in metaphor so no one could know what was contained therein.
It's an Enigma Code, literally.
The Metonic cycle, in chronology, is a period of 19 years in which there are 235 lunations, or synodic months, after which the Moon's phases recur on the same days of the solar year, or year of the seasons. The cycle was discovered by Meton (fl. 432 bc), an Athenian astronomer.
The Pyramid is also 230 metres square, or 235 Megalithic Yards.
En-men-dur-ana (also Emmeduranki) of Sippar was an ancient Sumerian king, whose name appears in the Sumerian King List as the seventh pre-dynastic king of Sumer. He was said to have reigned for 43,200 years
His name means "chief of the powers of Dur-an-ki", while "Dur-an-ki" in turn means "the meeting-place of heaven and earth" (literally "bond of above and below") Arc of the Covenant
There are also 86,400 seconds in a 24 hr day. 24 minutes is 1440 seconds, times 100 gives us 144,000
A list of ten kings was composed in Greece c. 280 BC by the Babylonian priest Berossos, and their reign totals 432,000 years. In the Icelandic Poetic Edda it is said that there are 540 doors in Odin's heavenly hall of warriors
Five hundred doors and forty there are
I ween in Valhalls walls;
Eight hundred fighters through each door fare
Where to war the Wolf they go.
The war with the Wolf was the recurrent battle of the gods and anti-gods at the end of each cosmic round. Here we have 540 x 800 = 432,000. In the Mahabharata and Puranic texts, the cosmic cycle of four world ages numbers 12,000 divine years, one year corresponding to 360 human years for a total of 12,000 x 360 = 4,320,000 human years. This is broken down into yugas as follows:
Kali = 432,000 years or 1200 x 360
Dwarpa = 864,000 years or 1200 x 360 x 2
Treta = 1,296,000 years or 1200 x 360 x 3
Satya = 1,728,000 years or 1200 x 360 x 4
The number 432,000 has been found in Europe (1100 AD), India( very ancient, and 400 BC), Mesopotamia (c 300 BC)in reference to a cosmic eon.
At the moment of the Spring equinox (March 21) the heavens are never quite in the same position they were the year before, since there is an annual lag of 50 seconds which in the course of 72 years amounts to 1 degree (50" x 72 = 3600" = 60' = 1 degree) and in 2160 years amounts to 30 degrees or one sign of the zodiac.
For instance, today the sun stands in Aquarius at the Spring equinox, in 1976 the sun stood in Pisces and in the time of Christ it was in Aries. This slippage is known as the precession of the equinox. Copernicus in 1526 AD calculated this same figure. We note also that the lag is 50 seconds/year or 1 degree in 72 years, 30 degrees in 2160 years, 360 degrees in 25,920 years or one complete cycle of the zodiac. But 25,920 divided by 60 gives 432. The ancient Sumerian calendar had five-day weeks or 72 x 5 = 360 days per year. But 360 x 72 = 25,920.
The integer 1200 represents the sum of the years in India for a cosmic cycle. Now
1200 x 201 = 241,200
1200 x 380 = 456,000
1200 x 360 = 432,000
These numbers correspond to the Sumerian tablet list of ten kings who ruled for a total of 456,00 years, a second tablet which lists only eight of these kings with a total of 241,200 years, and Berossos' list.
The Book of Genesis lists ten patriarchs from Adam to Noah and the Flood totalling 1656 years. In the Jewish calendar one year is 365 days. In 23 years plus 5 leap year days we have 8400 days or 1200 seven-day weeks. If we multiply 1200 x 72 we get 86,400 or the number of Jewish seven-day weeks in 1656 (23 x 72) years. Since the Babylonian calendar year was composed of 72 five-day weeks, then in 432,000 days there are 86,400 Babylonian five-day weeks. Then in 432,000 days there are 86,400 Babylonian five-day weeks (432,000/5). Thus the Bible concurs with the other lists as well.
The earth's axis wobble that causes the precession of the equinoxes is given as 25,920 years. Divided by the ancient number called "soss," 60, which was used in calculations, results in 432.
The Greek Ages also bear a close correspondence to the four Yugas of the Hindus: Krita-Yuga, Treta-Yuga, Dvapara-Yuga, and Kali-Yuga. Their method of calculation is described by Ullamudeian as follows:
"In each of the 12 signs there are 1800 minutes; multiply this number by 12 you have 21600; e.g. 1800 X 12=21600. Multiply this 21600 by 80 and it will give 1,728,000, which is the duration of the first age, called Krita-Yuga."
If the same number be multiplied by 60, it will give 1,296,000, the years of the second age, Treta-Yuga. The same number multiplied by 40 gives 864,000, the length of the third age, Dvapara-Yuga. The same multiplied by 20 gives 432,000, the fourth age, Kali-Yuga." (It will be noted that these multipliers decrease in inverse ratio to the Pythagorean tetractys: 1, 2, 3, and 4.)
The Essenes studied the Mysteries of Pythagoras.
His name means Heart (Bel) of the Serpent.
The cycle of the Phoenix encodes the astrological calendar by which they removed 3 days every 630 years. This was expressed in a Pythagorean Triangle of Dimensions 216 by 630 by 666.
6 x 6 x 6 is 216, there are 2160 years in an astrological age, and the Moon is 2160 miles in diameter. The solar metonic calendar using 60 6 day weeks produces 1 extra day every 216 years. There are also 216 Megalithic seconds in a day, and 216 letters in the name of God
@@uncannyvalley2350 what?
It could be that these language families were already differentiated by the time they arrived in the Americas.
Hi from Whitehorse, Yukon. We have a Beringia centre/museum that has a huge display on the bluefish caves. A Palaeontologist friend of mine helped set up the display and has additional artifacts that I got a chance to take a peak at. It’s fascinating! I’m particularly drawn to the micro blades technology they had that was in some cases as sharp as razor blades. Really enjoying your channel. Do you have a personal First Nations connection? Your thorough research definitely shows a deep respect for the first People of North America.
My partner of almost a decade is Native Hawaiian and I’m close with her whole family. So yeah, a little connected😂
Despite knowing of the Pre-Clovis vs Clovis First dogma, for over 20 years, this is the first real telling of that sordid story in US archaeological history. It is done VERY well, too!
man i even was taught the landbridge stuff in high school history, only a couple years ago (4? 5? who knows) and it always seemed like it lacked a lot of detail that would convince me, but we always brushed right by it. Thanks for making this great video! You address everything I'd thought of, lol. I am curious if multiple migrations are possible through different methods though, or even by the same method but multiple times, since there were multiple migrations to other parts of the world, but this gives me enough to research it on my own. great video :)
Native Americans are not first anywhere on the planet...
holy shit! i was about to go to bed when i caught this, fantastic vid as always!! cant thank you enough for your time, effort, and endless perseverance thru racist bogus fuckall """research""". im finally getting to learn more abt the athabascan side of my fam. after sniffing thru books as recent as the 90s in my local library, it is SUCH a breath of fresh air to have found your channel!!! in-depth, analytical, extensive sources, AND entertaining!!!!!!!
cant guarantee an exact time frame atm but def expect a new patron in the near future 🙏
Keep up the great content. So many people are just unaware of indigenous history and achievements.
Its not history. Its theory.
Not only is this more in depth than anything I got in public school, it's more interesting too. Thank you for all your labor on this. Just thank you!!
Great video! As a random future video suggestion it might be good to talk about the somewhat contentious topic of pre-Colombian population. I know of some debate/discussion on those numbers, including the “pre-Colombian plague” notion, but it’s rather politically loaded for the same reasons as presented in these videos, so I’m curious for a possibly less loaded perspective on that topic.
@@IndigenousHistoryNow I’ve put a hypothesis on the megafauna I’d like to get your thoughts on it , it’s also about migration, I know there things I’m not covering but I’d like your thoughts
terrifically informative video as always, thanks for uploading right before i got home from work
Thank you for your thoroughness and a very comprehensive rebuttal to the theories that are driven by hate rather than curiosity. I appreciate the work you put into your videos a lot - and I'm looking forward to other things you make!
This is very well researched. Good job! Glad to see more of this content online.
Thank you for this incredibly informative video! Much love and light to you. Looking forward to watching more
Mind blown. Kudos to you for this fantastic presentation 🤯👏
Thank you for taking the time to make the point about race, I've found on TH-cam that I'll be 5 minutes into a "history" video and then they'll say something VERY YIKES. Love your channel!
Radical
Thank you very much for such a carefully traced and eloquent refutation of the Bering Land Bridge and Clovis theories. It is a gorgeous, knowledgeable and courageous work of accompliship with Indigenous peoples.
A fantastic pair of videos! Very informative, it was a great idea to cover the archeological history of how we reached our current state of understanding of this history, and all the not-so-pure influences along that journey we see especially with hindsight now. That is so important to the scientific method itself after all.
Archeology (especially indigenous American focused,) was always high on my list of fascinations but never high enough to be what I really put effort and time into. Thank you for making these video essays you do, and doing so with such obvious desire to respect the modern descendants while pursuing the true understanding of peoples' history. You have my admiration and respect.
Thank you for your kind words!
I want to take issue with the issues you take with the overkill hypothesis.
The question of why some animals lived and others died as far as I can tell is a common problem for every theory attempting to explain the late Pleistocene extinctions, so it can't reasonably be considered a silver bullet against overkill any moreso than it can be climate change and asteroid impact hypotheses. What do we know about these animals as they compare against each other? What do we know about the Short Faced bear in terms of overall habits as it compared to the Brown Bear? Something has to explain why one of these animals lived and the other did not, and I think you have to admit that the selective spread problem will remain an issue for every theory, in that regard, what makes Overkill uniquely discredited by it?
We should probably also compare how similar animals fared in different parts of the world. You use Elk in comparison to horses, but Elk and horses don't really share the same environments or habits that much, and horses seemed to do poorly across the northern hemisphere, not just in North America. It may very well have been the case that if not saved by domestication in Central Asia, the horse would have flatly gone extinct across the globe roughly by time the first cities appear, and human influence was crucial to their decline in Asia as well. In the meantime Elk seem to have mostly pottered along without too much issue, at least before industrialization. When it comes to things like the short faced bear, what do we truly know about their extent and ability to withstand a shock that human influence might have brought with it compared to regular bears? They clearly must have had some important difference or else their respective fates wouldn't have diverged so much, so again, why does this particularly disprove overkill and not the other theories? If for example the short faced bear had a smaller, more vulnerable population, or restricted habitat compared to the famously adaptable and flexible Brown bear, that would have put it a disadvantage against both humans and climate change.
We know that these animals seemed to survive a variety of waxing and waning periods for glaciation throughout the past few million years, so what happened exactly to make the last one so particularly devastating? From the perspective of the entire Americas, the death toll for these animals seems extreme when you consider how long they were around and how they had already withstood these kinds of climatic changes before, proboscideans like Mastodons and large Xenarthrans like Ground Sloths are completely exterminated in this period, despite having survived the effects of every glacial advance and retreat for up to five million years prior to this with the vast climatic changes they brought with them. Do we have the evidence to show that the changes in the climate in the past 12K years (discounting human caused climate change I mean) was particularly extreme compared to previous ones, in such a way that effected essentially the entirety of North and South America, as well as Australia and Northern Eurasia, but weirdly not Africa and to a lesser extent Southern Asia to anywhere near the same degree? Why is it that this major change happens, and the most painfully obvious change to the environment was the entrance of an entirely new species that we know has probably the greatest ability to control the environment around them of any animal in history, but curiously manages to play no significant role in events that happen onward?
To make another point, the fact that humans appear sooner than we previously thought doesn't really debunk the overkill theory, it at worst forces some reconsideration about the course of how these extinctions may have gone, and I want to bring localized extinction events that happened in historical timeframes to support this. In Europe and the Middle East there used to be Aurochs and even lions across the land, but the Aurochs famously went extinct over a very long and slow process into the 17th century. Lions we know were present in Europe and the Middle East for thousands of years, well into the period of 'civilization', we have things like Assyrian reliefs of lion hunts, but they slowly went extinct from places like Greece by the time of the Roman empire. Elephants in different parts of the world shared a similar fate, most famously the North African ones that were used by the Carthaginians, but additionally in China (where elephants are rarely found in the extremities of Yunnan now) they ranged much further north all the way into the Yellow River valley, until about 4000-3500 years ago. This is well within the time period that China was settled by quite considerable state level organization, but again I think most people would agree that they ultimately died out from being unable to live alongside humans in that environment.
The point of all the above examples is that these were localized extinctions of major old world animals, in settings where they had already existed alongside humans for a very long time, but ultimately lost out slowly as humans became more dominant in the environment. Even a soft downward trend over a long period of time can annihilate large vulnerable species like this, and when we are talking about slow declines where hunting may not be common, but they have a negative enough effect on the populations of these big animals that it can't be sustained and they will eventually go extinct, that can be very hard to turn up archaeologically. And we do have evidence of some hunting in various parts of the Americas. We can't assume that humans showing up was always going to result in the quick and immediate destruction of all megafauna, it could have been a slow process pushed along by changing cultural norms, greater human population density, new technology, and changes in lifestyle that caused human relationships with the megafauna around them to develop into a negative direction.
I kind of dislike what I call the bloodbath version of the overkill hypothesis where people primarily talk about the most absurdly violent notions of people immediately killing every large animal they find, I prefer the idea that humans may have had a broadly stable relationship with animals like these for quite a long time, but were still an additional pressure that something like Mastodons had never dealt with before. When they then had to deal with cycles of climate change as the glaciers retreated, it might previously have made life more difficult for them but they nevertheless persisted on the whole until the extra pressure that human presence created to already vulnerable populations of large animals sent them on a downward spiral and ultimately extinction.
this was exactly what educates people. MVTO, Thank you.
Thanks for the video. You should look into the "Red Paint People. AKA swordfish hunters" from Maine and Newfoundland. These sites of this culture have dated back to 10,000 years ago and seemly disappeared about 3500 years ago. Mondernday natives arrived between 3,000 and 2500years ago to these far eastern regions. University of Maine and a Bruce Bourque 4 part TH-cam video has the best research I have found.
The root of the Algonquin who carried the Labrys also found at Gravinus in Brittany
Same time frame as the discovery of Copper
Ancient history is essential for everyone to know, especially the sixteen original civilizations.
1. The first inhabitants of Italy (K)
2. Thracians (L)
3. Siberians (N)
4. East Assists (O)
5. Medes (PQ)
6.. Western Europeans (R)
7. Mediterranean Greek sea people (T)
8. Hebrews and Arabic (IJ)
9. Elamites (H)
10. Assyrians (G)
11. Arameans (F1)
12. Lydians (F2)
13. Cushites (AB, C & D)
14. Egyptians (E3)
15. Canaanites (E2)
16. Original North African Phoenicians (E1)
The D haplogroup of Canaan migrated east all the way to Japan. The C haplogroup of Nimrod migrated to South Asia, the Pacific, Tibet, Mongolia and all the way to the Americas along with Q haplogroup descendants of Madai ancestor of the Medes.
The A maternal mtDNA haplogroup belonging to the N lineage accompanied the Q paternal haplogroup. The C&D maternal haplogroups belong to the M lineage. The B maternal haplogroup seems to have crossed the Pacific Ocean.
The Mediterranean paternal R1b and the maternal X2a also found in Galilee represent an Atlantic crossing of the Phoenicians in the days of King Solomon considering also the Mediterranean paternal haplogroups of T, G, I1, I2, J1, J2, E and B in addition to the R1b in Native American Populations.
Thank you for laying out this topic so well. Ive always been sceptic of the Clovis/land bridge hypothesis, for the reasons you’ve laid out (How did they manage in such a limited time to inhabit the americas and kill of all ice age species, it never made sense). What’s now catching my curiosity is how hunter gatherers settled more permanently in Monte Verde, the pacific northeast and Göbekli Tepe and the consequences on how we’ve been looking at farming, religion stratification and gender.
There is definitely more than enough evidence to disprove Clovis first but what in both videos disproves the Bering land bridge? It just seems the migration happened a lot earlier than what archeology accepted.
@@12pentaborane What I got from the video was -- Nothing to disprove folks crossing from Siberia down into the heart of North America before 20,000 years ago via Beringia, but also no undisputed physical remains to support it. However, I think he reported on some genetic evidence for peopling some 30,000 years ago, along with a lot of linguists very skeptical that the observed language diversity of the Americas could have happened in anywhere near as fast as 13,000 years. FWIW, my money is on the early land bridge, based on the genetic and linguistic evidence alone, and maybe its just the professional bias of archaeologists for excavated remains that prevents them from going there. Great pair of videos which I will share with my kids.
There appears to be a pattern of science being dictated by a prescribed policy (similar to the pandemic). Following the "science" you uncover the policies that dictate the predetermined outcome. In academia, if you want the cushion of tenure, don't think for yourself and remember the equation = Policy > Evidence
I love archaeology of the Americas because seemingly each year we are reminded of how new the field is, how different yet similar other societies and peoples were.
Humans then were the same as humans now. We know that before European contact, the continent was filled with large empires and state just like those in the old world. Even the tribal societies viewed as "primitive" maintained networks of trade across the entire continent.
The distance from Alaska to Patagonia is only around 10,000 miles. Are we really to believe that it took millennia for them to make it down there? Especially when we know peoples in the modern period (a time after the collapse of the vast states and empires of the Mississippi watershed) traveled the interior of the modern United States so regularly?
I wouldn't be surprised if the dates keep getting pushed farther back. The distance from the Suez to Patagonia is around 30,000 miles at most. Even moving only 1 mile every _year_ gives you a 30000 year "migration" from out of Africa to the bottom of South America.
I remain skeptical of every new find but I will never understand those who dogmatically ignore anything pushing habitation dates further back. I find it harder to believe that it took _as long as we think it did_ for humans to inhabit the continents. Maybe I'm way off the mark (I'm not an archaeologist) but whatever the truth is I know it will be intriguing.
Excellent content excellent presentation
Great set... you brought the topic around to the non expert very well.
I think you are politically on the correct side of the argument but there is a basic human consciousness aspect of conceptualizing Ice age era societies that should not be overlooked. Overkill does appear relevant to a certain extent and it’s not a “New World Phenomenon”. We are certainly experiencing it today although we now refer to it as “Overshoot.” In addition, I believe “race” has been shown to be a false pseudoscience and the term and concept are not used in scientific communities anymore. Cool video and channel you’ve got going here, all the best to you!
It is weird how you are ignoring the Atlantic.
You know what that model bust of Kennewick man means?
Obviously it's definitive proof of Star Trek First Contact Part 2 Picard's Children
We have always been here
Jesus Christ man you’re killing it upload at 1 am sweet christ
Hah, glad I didn't see it until today for that reason. 😂
well said
Interesting 🤔
36:16
I'd love to hear Marcel Mauss's take on this because he was convinced that in pre-history, the entire pacific rim was one large culture exchange area.
There are writings in greece about trips to south american
What about the South American origin of Polynesian crops such as yams?
That is contact that occurred within the last 1,000 years. That is well-verified, and not what I’m talking about in this video.
phenomenal ! such well-researched and informative couple of videos, really appreciate how you explicitly cut down the european colonialist/white supremacist ideology that dominates the typical narratives about this topic. it did feel a bit strange when you referred to "the land we live on" and "our country" at the end there as if youtube only exists in usa, but you know this is nitpickery.
Amazing video! Hit it right out of the park again! Honestly my favorite part was just looking at the language family maps of the US, really fascinating stuff.
forreal tho that water migration theory is very compelling... seems more than plausible to me that people who could migrate to japan could just keep going
38:55 You note at the bottom that we know there was contact between Polynesia and South America within the last millennium. I might be missing something, but isn't that inferred from there being trace Polynesian genetic markers in some modern-day South Americans, which you mentioned earlier? If the theory you're outlining here where ancient proto-Polynesians migrated to Siberia and eventually the Americas turned out to be true, wouldn't it negate that genetic evidence of Polynesian/South American contact within recent times?
To be clear, like you I'm unconvinced of this idea. This migration hypothesis is quite convoluted while a small band of medieval seafaring Polynesians making their way to South America at least once is extremely easy to imagine.
There was a genetic study about two years ago that found indigenous American DNA among a Polynesian population and they were able to trace that DNA to one person who lived about 800 years ago. It's not the same genetic marker as the pre-migration markers that both populations already shared. Hope that answers your question!
Clovis entering S America via Panama was highly unlikely, due to the nearly-impossible through Darien Gap near the Columbian frontier. Maps that show that paleoindians walked that route need to prove it. If they didn;t come that way, how DID they go to SA?
Wonderfull video.
Just 44:18 yes, it is ridiculous, at least for anything more than 200 years old, maybe 500.
This was an incredibly well done series, thank you. I had heard that the dating of recent sites had disproved the land bridge theory. But I didn't realize how thoroughly it had been disproved and how insidious some of it's ideological roots are. It's a shame that this is still the narrative the public at large believes.
Hope you continue to make great stuff like this in the future.
Platon wrote about atlantida
America has both oceans
The genealogy of prehistoric American archeology as settler colonial epistemology.
There was good reason to question Blue Fish Caves: settler colonial raison d'etre
also, thank you for explaining the genetics you certainly went over some mistakes that IVE made before, lol
Since haplogroup b is only found in native Americans, it suggest to me they could've been here all along, with migrations from Asia contributing a c and d later on
The distribution of Clovis sites and dates literally disproves any theory that they came from Asia. Not to mention northern Asian people had no stone technology. They used bones, not stones
And the hands in the south of argentina
How is your epilogue different from any history of conquest anywhere on earth amongst hominids of any kind, or any species at all? Are you an idealist or materialist?
To be fair to the Overkill Hypothesis; it's only racist when it doesn't get applied to the rest of the planet.
this sounds like a good cautionary tale in simply "accepting the science" because science is not static, it is ever developing, and old theories get debunked. Fervent belief in a theory makes for bad science regardless of the theory and just how for sure you think it is/
Yeah constantly preaching scientifique truth while pushing baseless hypotheses is what WE call "western sciences"
No one has ever explained how bows and arrows came to America 6000BC. Anyone know?
Are the parent-families of Europa indigenous or invasive? What is "original?"
The first peoples in the "Americas" must have been some of the best paleo-ship wielding peoples in the world at the time.
The island of pascua
Cerutti Mastodon
I like first 2/3's of what you presented without too much emotionalism and it seemed objective taking the time to consider all of the evidence.
The last part which I stopped at 53 minutes, I wonder about. I do not think you are completely wrong, but there seem to be things that you did not discuss. You seem to be on such a moral high horse to oppose white inspired racism that you did not even bother look at what peoples were inhabiting western europe in prehistoric times. The aboriginal populations were according the limited genetic evidence that we have were not light skinned and were genetically different from those of descended from Anatolian farming derived folk or the later Indo-Europeans. Infact before some of these lighter skin folk came there were also likely a lot of Sammi type folk that migrated there first, but the sammi may not have been the same as the original hunter gathers.
Richard Thornton, a creek native american, claims to have found northwest European bronze age artifacts in the southern eastern USA. He thinks that they are Sammi in origin. My own most limited reading suggests that people on the shores of northwest europe did have boats. Those of Doggerland certainly had boats. But if anyone came this way from there, they were not nordic white types until much later in perhaps the late bronze age or early iron age.
I see no mention of the pelagic hunting red paint people of the new england and canadian coasts. Is it possible that these native americans might have sailed to europe or was it was going both ways.
I am not the archeologist here, but have enough experience to know when I am not getting a well reasoned presentation. I strongly dislike self righteous attitudes and they have no good place in science. I dislike racists of any stripe or hue.
The cultures you mention-bronze age peoples, the red paint people-are much more recent than the time periods I’m talking about. It sounds like you missed where I mentioned I was specifically talking about the first people to reach North America, so at least 20,000 years ago; whereas you’re talking about peoples more within the last 10,000 years.
@@IndigenousHistoryNow I am aware of the dates involved and you did discuss more recent sea voyaging peoples from asia.
You also did not mention that the first H. sapiens of northwestern europe were not 'white'. You really sound like you may have your own version of Folsom first methodology. Just as they could not even consider the possibility of anyone here before a certain date, you can not consider anyone coming from anywhere else but Asia. But it was the tone and accusing anyone that thinks different is a white supremacist. To be honest currently I see no evidence for ancient migration from stone age europe, but again we just do not know yet. And that is where the discussion lies at the moment. To state absolutely that no one in those regions used boats in those times, well I really wonder about that. We do not know, but I would really be surprised if that is the one place where early man did not.
I never said that Pleistocene Europeans didn’t use boats. I said we have no evidence of them making pelagic voyages. Sailing the coastline of Europe and sailing the open North Atlantic are two very different things.
@5:00, the ego of academics?
Or a larger plan of obfuscation?
Clovis first was a theory based on absolutely no evidence completely pulled out of the proverbial ass of archaeologists who had no answers, and then repeated the lies so many times it became the answer and then defended that theory With a zeal that would cost dozens well minded archaeologists their careers when they would not confirm a theory that had no evidence
Is all mud
Great video but I had a laugh at the phrases “our country’s colonial past”. Kinda weird when you started to speak directly to your people. It took me a moment to realize what was happening. Land back?
What is it that you're insinuating?
Is there something wrong with acknowledging and apologizing for colonialism? You seem to be dismissive of that segment, as if something ridiculous is being said.
@@swest6982 as if the USA does not have a colonial present.
It persists because it's interesting, and because fascinating clues were found, not because of Eurocentric obsessions. We people who have spent a lot of time in various sized boats at sea, and are familiar with Eskimo/Inuit lifestyles, would say that your characterization of travel along the North Atlantic Ice is absurd. Generally, this is a fairly informative video (except where you titter and giggle and find yourself so witty), but I really think you're wrong in thinking it's about racist Europeans Americans! There's plenty of them, sadly, but I'm afraid Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley are not among them, nor are at least most people who find the Solutrean Hypothesis fascinating. The diatribe at the end of the video could have been edited out to beneficial effect. For my favorite paleo lithic mystery, look into the Clovis point found and a relict beach in Vermont, made of Ramah Bay chert from Northern Labrador, available only by sea. Seaworthy boats were a thing for a very long time.
Multiple migrations, the Clovis by land bridge, the Solutreans over the ice 30-25k years ago, and by boat, from the Iberians Egyptians and Phoenicians, to the Assyrians, Greeks, and Nordics. As well as Chinese, Polynesian, Japanese and Korean.
This can be demonstrated in the mathematics encoded into their Megalithic structures, the homogenous nature of Megalithic structures like the Mounds of Liousiana, and the Dolmen of New England, as well as the Labrys, and Hydra, among a range of Astrological and astronomical connections, all verifiable with math
Maybe I will just continue to believe the stories of my ancestors: that we have always been here. Or maybe I'll see evidence that ancestors of mine, a very long time ago came here from Siberia. One thing I know is that we are all here now, and as humans, we are overpopulating the planet, and that almost all of our problems arise from that. What are we to do about it? Perhaps we should have fewer kids, while trying to find legitimate ways of living more harmoniously in our surroundings. I do not have faith that we will do any of that. We make electric cars so that we will not have to rely so much on fossil fuels, but we aren't really using less fossil fuels. We still have to burn coal and oil to make the electricity, and we still have to mine the lithium to make the batteries, so we are just removing the damage from our sight. We are like babies that way. If you hide something from a baby, in that baby's mind, it doesn't exist any more. If you don't have to pump the fossil fuel into your car anymore, In your mind it does not exist anymore, even though we have to use more fossil fuel to make the electricity tor you to use on demand. Now you don't have to accept any of the guilt yourself. You can just blame the damn electric company for using fossil fuel. What's the option? Nuclear and the eternal storage of the radio active waste from there? Solar, which wouldn't generate enough electricity to meet demand even if you plastered the whole country with solar cells, not to mention the environmental damage of mining the materials and getting rid of the unbelievably caustic chemicals required to etch them? Hydroelectric, which drowns large areas of land and kills off native fishes, and ultimately will have to be taken down when their serviceable life is over, leaving vast quantities of silt which can't be planted and which blows around causing breathing problems and death for animals and humans alike? The only sure cure for our environmental problems is the reduction of our population over time, and a time of austerity until we reduce our number to a sustainable level. No one is going to agree with this approach, and our population, which is the real problem, will keep growing and growing and growing until we grow ourselves into extinction. That is what will happen with the human species, no matter how you think we got to the places we live or what race we are. Our brains are just not evolved enough for us to do what we must if we are to survive as long as we have as a species, and with that, all study of where we came from will be rendered irrelevant, as will all other human endevour.
Please ask your self which demographics of peoples should be populating less like you suggest and why them.
@@googanslayer6675 Do as China did. You make one baby and you're done. Snip snip for both the man and the woman. There will be some like me, who either can't have a child, or who don't want to. That will help with population reduction. If it is a world wide thing, we will see a sizable change in the world population in one lifetime. Still, it will take several lifetimes to get our population down to a manageable size. I will say now that I'm sure that people will not agree to do it, or really to do any of the other things which will help bring climate change, pollution, and habitat loss to heal. We humans are a species who seem bound and determined to destroy ourselves, and most (if not all) other life along with us. We are selfish. It's a sad thing to say, but if you think about it, you will see that it is true.
interseting content horrible sound, couldn't listen :(
Man, there are some real sonic princesses on TH-cam. Yeah, the sound wasn't pristine, but "couldn't listen to it"? I heard it just fine, and appreciate that you decided to upload such a meticulously researched piece of work. Thanks.
Dennis Stanford spent his career trying to find the origin of Clovis technology...he searched Siberia and found a completely different style ...so when they saw the solutrean type tools they imagined a connection...and found some interesting solutrean like tools in the north east us...none of this was based on race...and as he also pointed out...there weren't white Europeans 23000 years ago....this occurred within the last 10000...so there may still be a connection here but requires DNA analysis of remains from this time period...and we may never find any...so to exclude a reasonable hypothesis because of your perceived racism is quite unscientific...anyway looks.like there are older sites than the footprints at 23000 but none quite as convincing....so other migrations likely occurred from Asia through Siberia...
So basically nobody really knows.
Ashkenazis
Clovis was Europeans
Slavs
Could the racist commenters please explain what racism they are referring to since Solutreans were black.
conquering isn't to be ashamed of but to take pride in.
Can you see why this comment can be problematic?
If by conquering you mean 'bought some land' then sure. Although, committing one of the largest genocides in human history seems like something you should probably be ashamed of.
race is a social construct, lol. like entirely. it has no genetic basis, very good video otherwise and generally surprising your channel has as little attention as you do
Are you being sarcastic here? Race is indeed fully a social construct. Yes, obviously phenotypes are inherited and ethnicity more or less exists although borders will always be fuzzy, but actual genetic distinctions do not fall neatly into what we think of as "races". When you from scratch try to find commonalities among different ethnic groups based purely on genetics and not just phenotype, stuff happens like Koreans and Scandinavians being very similar while different dark skinned Africans having extremely little in common. There is more genetic diversity within Africa than there is between Africa as a conglomerate and the rest of the world. As in, a given African population is more likely to have genetic markets in common with a non-African group than a different African one. This shouldn't be surprising since all humans trace lineage back to Africa if you go back far enough. It sure doesn't line up neatly with the existence of a "Black race", though. The same principle applies for all humans, no matter what "race" happens to be in vogue to call them at the time.
@@HessianHunter i fully agree with you, i wasn’t being sarcastic. the video was giving the idea of it being self evident and atleast somewhat genetic more credit than i thought it deserved
I don't think the video at any point claimed that race was anything other than a social construct. There was discussion of DNA analysis (mtDNA haplogroups, in this case), but the only discussion of phenotypic features in relation to DNA was that those features weren't reliable indicators of shared genetics. The point of such discussion in the video was to address poorly conceived alternative theories of the arrival of humans in the Americas.
Genetic sequencing can be useful when studying determining past migratory patterns, but it certainly doesn't tell the whole story and thus can't stand alone as evidence. However, I fail to see where this video mentioned it as something more than supporting evidence, except where a bad theory was being corrected.
So not the first place I put this but my hypothesis looks at mega fauna and assumes that Europeans were not weaker dumber or just worse hunters than native Americans or Australian Aboriginal, so it took 20 k years give or take from Homo sapiens move into Europe Asia , to the last mega fauna died ( I don’t think we killed them , but that we are a force of nature and ecosystems adapt to us not the other way round ) Australia same , ppl arrive about 60 k yrs and then by 40 k yrs ago all megafauna dies , if this hood true then ppl arrived in america about 27 k bc and megafauna goes extinct by 12 k bc and before someone says volcanoes asteroids etc let me remind u all the last mammoth didn’t go extinct in an island that was uninhabited till 3000 k yrs ago when ppl arrived
Edit 1650 bc was when mammoths went extinct. One caveat is birds , mega birds seem not to last more than a few hundred years
The Solutrean Hypothesis has absolutely no basis in race. It’s solely based on the lithic evidence. And only a hypothesis after all.
You’re right on the academic side. But there is a public conception of the Solutrean hypothesis which is different than what you’ll find in academic sources, and in this public view of it race does play a significant role. I’m going to be remaking these videos at some point and I’ll do a better job at highlighting that distinction.
@@IndigenousHistoryNow thank you for being forthcoming this. Love the videos. Keep up the good work.
They have it in north europe
Huns vikings
Not all europeans are the same
And they found that south indians have in common same dna with some europeans
Very poorly produced.