I was removed form my first class, and banished to the school library for arguing with my teacher over the date at which America was settled. The textbook said 12-14,000 years BP. My Time Life Ascent of Man 3 volume set gave inconclusive evidence for dates as early as 37,000 BP.

12 years later, in Brian Fagan's Out of Eden, the venerable anthropologist admitted that the fact that human habitation sites miraculously seem to spring up at 12-14,000 years from the sub-Arctic to the sub-Antarctic does argue for settlement by boat, along coast lines not currently in existence.

Of course, the huge disconnect for me has always been the classic depiction of early man walking across the Bering Land Bridge, a childlike theory later improved on by the idea of Beringia, a Siberian-Alaskan Eden which was suddenly flooded at the end of the ice age and sent man down into Canada and beyond. In both cases, the way was in fact blocked by over 1,000 miles of glaciers and ice-bound mountains.

Now we have human habitation sites in Virginia and Maryland dating to before the 14,000 year creed, with sites pushing 20,000 BP in Texas and deep into South America. The accepted wisdom of assuming that stone age man migrated between continents exclusively on foot is based on the fact that official European settlement of distant continents did not occur in the stone age [supposedly]. This absolutely ignores the fact that the stone age Caucasian Ainu of Japan settled that archipelago something like 20,000 years BP, via sea passage, that the humans with the lowest IQ, Australian Aborigines, sailed to Australia 40,000 years BP and that the stone age Polynesians sailed the entire Pacific and made landfall in North and South America [according to genetic, archeological and agricultural evidence].

Why was the ample evidence of stone age navigation suppressed for 200 years?

I leave that to the reader. Indeed, my purpose in covering this subject slightly is to offer a possible explanation for why Amerindian tribes of the east and Europeans intermarried regularly, prolifically and with minimal social tension, where the tribes of the west and the Americans demonstrated a higher level of animosity, less intermarriage, with the settlement of California actually featuring the hunting to extermination of various indigenous tribes. Could it be that that lower racial tension in the east had something to do with a pre-existing racial similarity, such as the bearded chiefs Powhatan, Mosca and Henry who greated European explorers in 1609 and 1614?

The purpose in writing Plaeface is merely to prove that indigenous Americans of the Eastern Woodlands were largely mixed race, for which clear artistic, literary and demographic proof exists. I only offer strong evidence for significant intermarriage from 1566 onward, understanding that there is also strong evidence for earlier European contact from the periods of Norse, Celtic and even "Clovis" cultural dominance.

bering land bridge map

:

DNA Analysis Shows Native Americans Had European Roots - SPIEGEL ONLINE

A New History of the First Peoples in the Americas - The Atlantic

"Cactus Hill ~ 18,000(!) Year Old Virginia Mining Site"

"Texas' 18,000(!?!) Year Old Gault Site"

The Foundational Falsehoods of the American Dream