I saw in this land an Indian woman and a child who would not stand out among white blonds.

These people [of the upper class] say that they were the children of the idols” (gods)

– Pedro Pizarro, chronicler of the Spanish conquest of Peru

“The remarks made by Pizarro as to the skin- colour of the Peruvians are very important and, probably, truthful. Today one finds people who claim to be pure Indian in blood who are very light in colour, but it is not possible to be sure that they have not some white blood”

Note 139, page 528, The Discovery and Conquest of The Kingdoms of Peru by Pedro Pizarro in Two

Volumes, Volume II, translated into English and annotated by Philip Ainsworth Means, The

Cortes Society, New York (1921)

19,000 year old stone tools have been found at precisely the wrong end of the Americas (southern Chile), so yeah, where were those ‘land bridge’ North Americans prior to 14,500 years ago? As well, several Amazon tribes have been discovered to be the most closely related (of all modern peoples) to the Austral-Asian peoples of Papua and Australia; with no comparable (or even remote) intermediate genetic relationships to the north of their Amazon location until you get to the Aleutian Islands and a population of late arrivals from Siberia. The most common sense explanation is the ancestral Austral-Asian type found in the Amazon tribes’ genetics journeyed to South America about the same period as Papua and Australia were initially peopled (40,000 to 60,000 years ago.) But, all those anthropologists with ‘Boners for Beringia’ have stretched logic (and inflated their credulity) by insisting these Amazon tribes genetics could only have arrived via Siberia within the last 15,000 years; while ignoring “New Evidence Puts Man in North America 50,000 Years Ago.” There are numerous problems with the 15,000 years ‘mainstream’ postulate; it ignores evidence from linguistics, it ignores other cultural evidence, it ignores physical evidence, and most of all, it ignores the primitive and nativistic nature of western empiricism’s roots.

What began this rant is, an example of White on White denial. God forbid a handful of White people might have been in North America 12,000 years ago … because this would put a big dent in the ego of the White people who were concerned a mere 500+ years ago they might sail off the edge of the flat Earth. Never mind Copernicus and Galileo had some idea things like our planet might be round and rotating around the Sun a hundred or two hundred years before that. If White people had made it from Europe to North America in the ancient past, before earliest rise of socalled ‘Western Civilization’, what does that say about the White people whose science was killing their patients with blood-letting doctors as recently as 200 years ago? So, what is the example of recent hysterical denial of anthropology in relation to this? An 18 month old boy, found in Montana, who’d buried more than 12,000 years ago. Oh, and the fact he wasn’t White.

This find, as posed by science, doesn’t square with Native Oral History and in the same moment, if you look at some facts conveniently ignored, suddenly it does square with Blackfoot Oral history but the anthropologists will flush this down the commode (like a junkie with the police at his door) at every opportunity. More on this, but first:

There is completely ignored (by physical & cultural anthropologists) linguistics study from the 1990s, pointing to Native American migration beginning in South America some 40,000 years ago indicating migration from south to north:

“When North America was an ice-age tundra, the first Americans were “cooking” their cultures in the tropical south, moving northward and settling as the glaciers retreated, according to new linguistic evidence from indigenous languages throughout the New World.

“The evidence suggests that humans have been in the Americas for a very long time, perhaps 40,000 years. It also suggests that most native American languages derived from Ice Age inhabitants who were isolated in the Western Hemisphere for many millennia.

“Only along the west coast do languages appear to come from immigrants who arrived after the Ice Age 14,000 years ago, a Berkeley linguist reports”

The linguistics study is consistent with Blackfoot Oral History.

But when advances in DNA supported this preceding study, physical and cultural anthropology couldn’t bring themselves to admit to the possibility, and so they invented ‘trapped in Beringia’ for 20,000 years:

“UF [University of Florida] scientists analyzed DNA sequences from Native American, New

World and Asian populations with the understanding that modern DNA is forged by an accumulation of events in the distant past, and merged their findings with data from existing archaeological, geological and paleoecological studies.

“The result is a unified, interdisciplinary theory of the “peopling” of the New World, which shows a gradual migration and expansion of people from Asia through Siberia and into Beringia starting about 40,000 years ago; a long waiting period in Beringia where the population size remained relatively stable; and finally a rapid expansion into North America through Alaska or Canada about 15,000 years ago”

The problem with the preceding is, it does not take into account the languages requiring diffusion over a vast area and the evidence the languages provide pointing to a migration from the south with only the most recent languages making the Siberia connection, and in a limited West coast geography. Unfortunately, the UF “interdisciplinary theory” seems to lack inclusiveness with any study pointing to credible alternatives.

The proposal the Native American Clovis is derived from the Western Europe’s Solutrean is also consistent with Blackfoot Oral History…

Preceding page illustrations: Solutrian (above) & Clovis (below)

Working at multiple sites across the continent, researchers found nanodiamonds – microscopic particles thought to be found on comets – in a 13,000-year-old layer of rich sedimentary soil called a “black mat.” Beneath the layer with the nanodiamonds, fossils of the animals are abundant. After that layer, they disappear, [Allen] West said.

“It’s extraordinary that tens of millions of animals disappeared synchronously at exactly the time when the diamonds and carbon layer are laid down across the continent,” said West, whose coauthors include DePaul University chemist Wendy Wolbach.

Arrowheads and other artifacts from the Clovis culture of humans – an early hunter-gatherer society – also vanish after the black mat was laid down 13,000 years ago

…but has been dismissed by anthropologists claiming the DNA Native Americans hold in common with Paleolithic Western Europeans of roughly the same era cannot have come via the Atlantic route because of another, 24,000 year old, boy found in Southern Siberia (a LONG ways from Beringia) with European genes also has DNA markers common to modern Native Americans:

“Genetically, this individual had no east Asian resemblance but looked like Europeans and people from west Asia. But the thing that was really mind-blowing was that there were signatures you only see in today’s Native Americans”

But the boy can’t be Native American according to land bridge worshiping anthropologists with this far-fetched logic:

“Willerslev’s team suggests that after the ancestors of Native Americans split off from those of east Asians, they moved north. Somewhere in Siberia, they met another group of people coming east from western Eurasia — the people to whom the Mal’ta boy belonged. The two groups mingled, and their descendants eventually travelled east into North America”

The automatic assumption is the South Siberian boy is the ancestral type which did not appear in North America until 10,000 years later, demanding the unique Native American DNA markers arrived via the Bering land bridge only 15,000 years ago. This stretch of the imagination presumes the boy from 24,000 years ago has a bloodline which had come from very far away from where would be expected (Western Europe) and yet absolutely no thought is given to the idea the modern, exclusively Native American DNA match also found in the boy could have originated with a population already in the Americas for 16,000 years prior to the Siberian boys death some 24,000 years ago. In effect, it is demanded by science that if you put a 24,000 year old uniquely Native American bloodline with shared DNA of Western Europe’s Paleolithic people, in southern Siberia, as far from its Western European Paleolithic roots as it is from uniquely Native American matched DNA, it has to be European/Asian precursor of people who later migrated to the Americans and cannot be Native American. The Bering land bridge is demanded to be a one way street and no one is allowed to live on the American side of the bridge prior to 15,000 years past.

It never occurs to the anthropologists the Siberian boy might have Native American ancestry which had migrated from the Americas to Siberia within the past 25,000 or so years, no matter how much more sense this might make. It is (direct line) 4,000 miles from Portugal, where you would expect to find the Western European Paleolithic genetic makers (and from where a sea crossing might be made) to Florida and by far more distance overland (via Siberia) west to east than the direct (west to east) 10,000 miles from Portugal to near where the genetically related (to the Siberian) Montana boy was found. The anthropological assumption automatically denies people might have known how to make sea crossings between 12,000 and 40,000 years ago. This specific denial can only be founded on the ethno-centric bias of scientists whose own history indicates a belief in a flat Earth a mere 500+ years past (ok, so this last was a Washington Irving joke but it’s not far off the mark.) And the insistence there could not have been an Atlantic crossing to explain the European genetic markers is hammered on:

“This new origin story helps to resolve several peculiarities in New World archaeology. For example, ancient skulls found in both North and South America have features that do not resemble those of East Asians. They also carry the mitochondrial haplogroup X, which is related to western Eurasian lineages but not to east Asian ones.

“On the basis of these features, some scientists have suggested that Native Americans descended from Europeans who sailed west across the Atlantic. However, says Willerslev, “you don’t need a hypothesis that extreme””

A simple but undesirable “hypothesis that extreme” of a 4,000 mile sea voyage has been replaced with a hyper-convoluted and much less likely hypothesis a more than the (direct west to east line) 10,000 mile overland trek requiring 20,000 years ‘trapped in Beringia’ to protect the land bridge theory. Now let’s return to the boy from 12,000+ years ago found in Montana and identified with Clovis culture and the sweeping assumptions surrounding his discovery:

“another theory, supported only by archaeological evidence, was that ancient Native Americans came from people who migrated across the Atlantic Ocean from Western Europe before the last Ice Age—the so-called Solutrean hypothesis. “This genetic study provides unequivocal evidence that this did not happen,” said coauthor Michael Waters, a geoarcheologist at the Texas A&M University

“[the] genome also suggests that modern Native Americans are direct descendants of the Clovis population. The ancient genome is similar to those of peoples from both North and South America, suggesting that a single founding population migrated into the Americas close to the time of the last Ice Age” [in effect, 15,000 years ago]

More hammering by the anthros on killing the Atlantic crossing, they never tire of it but here’s a bit more: A new DNA study has found sudden explosion of particular male Y chromosomes in the Americas about 15,000 years ago. This would fit nicely with the arrival of Solutrean (i.e. Clovis) technology from Europe…

“The best explanation is that they may have resulted from advances in technology that could be controlled by small groups of men. Wheeled transport, metal working and organised warfare are all candidate explanations that can now be investigated further”

…but the study avoids any mention of the possibility of a Solutrean source of this event in the Americas as though it were plague. But in fact the timeline bears investigating in this regard; if there were a single, small, incursion of Solutrean technology into the Americas around the end of that culture in Europe 16,000 years ago, a 15,000 years ago genetics impact in the Americas is not implausible; as it would take some time for the seed or understanding of the new technology to take hold in a demonstrated way. By 13,500 years ago Clovis has been established.

This is not an unreasonable timeline to mesh 3 events; 1) arrival of Solutrean technology 2) associated Y chromosome explosion by those adopting the technology and 3) establishment of Clovis technology.