Humans reached Americas 100,000 years earlier than thought

[norseman]

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-earth-looks-like-during-an-ice-age-2014-5

 

16000 plus years ago a dog team would have been more useful than a leather boat.

[Guest DWA]

I love the "earlier than thought."  Why would one presume that the earliest evidence *we have found* is perforce the earliest arrival of humans?  (Hint:  this find.)  Scientists have a bad habit of doing stuff like this.

[JDL]

So who did this before ocean levels rose?

 

http://www.academia.edu/3779666/Ancient_Canal_Builders_-_Overview

[Twist]

8 hours ago, JDL said:

So who did this before ocean levels rose?

 

http://www.academia.edu/3779666/Ancient_Canal_Builders_-_Overview

 

Thanks JDL, down the rabbit hole I go !  I've always been fascinated by the inexplicable things we find on the ocean floor.   

[SWWASAS]

I would be willing to bet that much of the early human evidence in North America is under 100 to 200 feel of water off shore.     That of course requires that humans got here during the last ice age when the ocean levels were much lower.      Science,  while willing to say the Bering crossing is the how they got there,  they are reluctant to push the date of that arrival well back into the last ice age.    That is both contradictory and makes no sense.       If humans walked here, then the only time the ocean levels were low enough for that to happen was well into the last ice age, which is earlier than the accepted evidence of humans in North America.    The argument that it cannot be much earlier than the first human artifact dating presupposes that nothing earlier will be found.    That argument is very similar to the fact that BF cannot exist because we have yet to find remains.   

[Guest DWA]

That, precisely.  I've always wondered how many sasquatch (progenitor) remains might be under the Bering Sea too.

Given every single thing scientists know about this, there is no reason to believe that the first humans in NA don't well predate *these* most recent finds.

Edited May 13, 2017 by DWA

[SWWASAS]

In the middle of the ice ages the only Northern Latitude areas that were habitable were coastal regions where the temperatures were moderated by the ice free ocean.     That pretty much forced mankind and BF for that matter to hug the coasts to survive.      Recently I looked at a supposed ice shield map during the last ice age.      I don't know what the map maker was using for data,  but areas that have been heavily glaciated show tell tale geologic signs of it.    Linear scoring, smoothing of rocks,  gouging out valleys,     and  glacial moraines.   While that stuff can all be found today in the Western Mountains,   Alaska and in areas in the Great Lakes and the North East,  none of that is evident where I live West of the Cascades.      Even Central Park in New York city has glacier evidence,   so where glaciers were during the ice age,   evidence is there.      However that map showed that the very area where I live was under the ice sheet.   There is no geological evidence that was true.      I suspect that the map maker used glacial evidence found in the Cascades now, and sort of included large areas around it to make the map.      There are many micro climates in the PNW, and a weather can very considerably, within 100 miles away.      It is 48 and raining where I live today but 25 miles away it is snowing above 4500 feet on Mt St Helens.      Something like that might be common in the East Coast or Mid West, because of lack of mountain influence and blocking,   but it certainly is here.      I have had people from the East and Midwest be amazed that it can rain here for days without thunderstorms.     They do not see that where they live.   It usually takes a thunderstorm to make significant rain East of the Rockies.  

[Twist]

Living near Lake Michigan we know all about rain without thunderstorms.  Last week while camping I had 4 days of nothing but gray sky's, moderate to heavy rain and high winds.  Not a bit of thunder or lightning though.  

[SWWASAS]

I would give Lake Michigan credit for that.        In the Mid West cumulonimbus are usually the source of rain.      CB's are a stage of development away from thunderstorms.     If I had a dollar for every hour I have flying over Lake Michigan I could host quite a banquet for the forum member    One winter night I hit a flock of geese over the lake doing 325 knots.       Tore up the airplane pretty bad.     What they were doing flying at night is beyond me.     I guess they had to fly till they got to land to bed down for the night.       

Edited May 16, 2017 by SWWASAS

[Twist]

^^ most definitely it's the lake.  The lake has a big effect on all our weather.  We can have rain come out of nowhere one day and then the next it'll break up a huge storm heading our way and make an expected rain day beautiful and sunny.