Migration Mystery: Who Were the First Americans?

Michael Bawaya, New Scientist, April 5, 2013

Not so long ago there was a simple and seemingly incontrovertible answer to the question of how and when the first settlers made it to the Americas. Some 13,000 years ago, a group of people from Asia walked across a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska and headed south.

These people, known to us as the Clovis, were accomplished toolmakers and hunters. {snip}

For decades this was the received wisdom. So compelling was the Clovis First model that few archaeologists even contemplated an alternative. Some with the temerity to do so complained of a “Clovis police”, intent on suppressing dissent.

{snip}

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • The__Bobster

    Theory? There’s plenty of genetic and physical evidence to prove we were here first. Of course, the Injuns and their supporters like to bury it so that the savages can remain “victims”.

    • Bossman

      If “we” were here first why didn’t Columbus meet any white men on his arrival? What happened?

      • PlumberofNazareth

        If we were here first, I think the dearth of evidence indicates that there was only a small population present. We likely either got killed off by or assimilated into the larger and more organized Siberian/Clovis/Asian societies coming in from the west.

        • Sick of it

          Probably a mix of the two, if you’ll excuse the pun.

        • some1smart

          The Clovis were Wight brotha

      • libertarian 1234

        Part of the Solutrean theory is that there was a bit of mixing with Indians after they entered the Solutrean occupied areas of the US. One scientist maintains that some tribes had about 25% Solutrean DNA.

        But the tools and weapons found here are definitely the same as those in Europe and are dated about 17,000 years ago.

        Here’s a hypothesis for anyone interested that offers a theory depicted in videos I found by searching youtube.

        To me it was captivating. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZrXQy2tJDw

      • hmm, I’d say that would be due to the fact that Columbus didn’t land on American soil, It was the actually the Bahamas. There is also evidence to suggest that Viking landed on American soil several times over, just never colonized it, hell there is speculation that the Knight’s Templar may have even came.

  • DonReynolds

    There is no reason why people could only migrate from one direction. Travel from Western Europe across the Atlantic is much shorter than the sea route from Asia. And there is no reason to suppose that these different people did not mix well in the wild, as has happened everywhere else on the globe, especially when talking about such a long duration.

  • brengunn

    The idea of European migration seems completely implausible but whatever the DNA throws up I’ll be willing to accept. I imagine they will just be an earlier wave of Asians. It certainly matters from an archeological position but I don’t think it matters at all as a ‘claim’ or anything like that. The knowledge is an end in itself.

    • Sick of it

      They’ve already discovered ancient Caucasoid skeletons.

    • Dazed

      I remember reading that a guy sailed the Atlantic in an Egyptian long boat to prove that ancient civilisations could have set foot on North America.

  • PlumberofNazareth

    It’s likely that Precolumbian natives are an amalgamation of various groups, most of whom crossed from Siberia, but also some who came from parts further south in East Asia proper. While I don’t think that there was a large-scale proto-European population on the Eastern Seaboard of America and in other locales, it’s not entirely inconceivable. Witness the Kennewick man and the artifacts found around the Chesapeake mentioned in the above article.

    Really, anything is plausible at this point, until we can sit down and compare the genotypes/phenotypes of confirmed Siberian, East Asian, and/or Proto-European colonists.

    • PlumberofNazareth

      On a related note, it’s also pretty much been confirmed that there were multiple instances of European contact with American “natives” between Lief’s expedition to Vinland and Columbus’ discovery of San Salvador. The Basques and Bretons almost certainly discovered Vinland/Newfoundland before 1400, as we know they had been fishing the Grand Banks since the early 1200’s. The English fleets in Bristol had also begun to fish at least as far west as Flemish Cap by 1450, so it’s likely they had set foot on lands to the west to replenish supplies (Bristol to the Grand Banks and back is a rather arduous journey without resupply). If I were an aspiring archeologist, I’d be scouring the shores of the Avalon Peninsula.

  • josh

    Didnt white people reach Egypt,and were responsible for the Pyramids? Didnt they prove KingTut had that R1 thing-which corresponds to modern day Iirsh,the last outpost of the ever-faring Keltics??Didnt they go to China? What is so outlandish about whites–whether French “soultreans”,Scandanavians,or Irish wayfarers– going to America??Nuttin!!

    • Sick of it

      If you want to go back to the ancient tribes as stated in the Bible, Noah had three sons (Shem, Ham, and Japheth), each of whom founded one of the major population groups of humanity. Ham (red-haired) could be found in ancient North Africa, the Near East, and parts of Europe. The Irish more than likely migrated to their present homeland from North Africa, considering how long the native populations had lived in North Africa and the similarities between the gaelic and berber languages. It has already been proven that Rameses II was a redhead. The Bible mentions redheaded folks in the ancient Near East.

  • bigone4u

    The blacks are again left completely out of a discussion on the advancement of civilization. Boo hoo.

    • PlumberofNazareth

      I’m not sure building teepees and doing Ghost Dances counts as “advancing civilization”, but I agree with you in principle.

    • Advancement of civilization would have gone no where without Black culture. Many examples,starting with how Elvis and Mick Jagger stole their rhythm and blues.

      • conan

        Right. And blacks stole that from Rockabilly, which came from Bluegrass, which came from traditional music from Ireland and Scotland.

      • freddy_hills

        Blues combines European harmonic structure with traditional African singing. Blacks borrowed the music from whites and tweaked it. Then whites took that and tweaked it again. Musicians and artists are always borrowing from other cultures. But most of the time the influence is minimal.

      • gemjunior

        It would have gone nowhere without black culture? Muti, cannabolism, goats performing witchcraft and casting spells? Good God. They have never contributed anything of worth to this earth, ever, at all. Think about the accomplishments of the Romans, and the Greeks, the explorers of Northern Europe. And that’s just scratching the surface. Africa? No wheel, no architecture, no stair, no seaworthy vessel, no domesticated animal. Come on. The only thing they do with skill is walk around with large packages on their heads and balancing them.

  • PBL

    Without the DNA evidence to support another theory, the out of Asia story remains intact.. The only question are: When? And how?

  • Romulus

    Notice that once the nat geo special of the unveiling of Rameses DNA came on once, it was taken off the air. The director of egyptian antiquities(zahi hawass) inadvertently disclosed that Rameses had red hair. Not dyed with ocher, but actual red hair. Which we now know occurs naturally in ONLY one race. Think maureen o’hara. Evidence is usually suppressed that exhibits “whites” in a positive fashion. We are also well aware that middle easterners are notorious for destroying evidence of other peoples history,culture,and artifacts. See the destruction by the the taliban of the 4000 yr. Old buddha statues.

    • PlumberofNazareth

      Yep, I saw that. However, there are other explanations. While it is conceivable that Celts and proto-Celts settled in the Middle East (we know for a fact that they did in Anatolia), it seems far more likely that there was simply a large strain of Assyrian/Yezedi/Kurdish/Persian genes in Egypt at the time. Iranic ethnic groups such as Persians and Kurds have naturally-occurring light hair and colored eyes in something like 15-20% of their population. Knowing the tendency for ancient Persians to be natural empire-builders, it seems more likely that the royal family of Ancient Egypt may in fact have originated in modern-day Kurdistan or Iran. With the Hyksos (a Semetic tribe from somewhere in the Middle East) and Hurrians (proto-Kurds who spoke an Indo-European tongue) invading Egypt in the circa 1800 BC, it’s likely that relatively “white-looking” phenotypes entered the Nile Valley in this way, rather than from a strictly European source.

      • PlumberofNazareth

        Some links for reference:

        European-looking Kurdish kids: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Children_puppy_sulaimania.jpg

        Map of Hurrian (proto-Kurd/Indo-European) kingdoms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Orientmitja2300aC.png

        • Martel

          And you claim they do not have European DNA?
          Real Turks (Anatolia) are whites, don’t confuse them with the Turkic invaders.

          • PlumberofNazareth

            They are white Indo-Europeans, certainly, but not Celtic or German. Think Scythian/sarmatian/Persian, or even Caucasian/Circassian/Chechen.

      • Romulus

        I’ll agree to an extant. The descriptors of the aforementioned people is 1800 yrs bce. There is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that “whiter” people occupied a larger range throughout Europe before the end of the last ice age(11000 yrs ago). Figurine artifacts on the north slope of the black sea and the red haired skeleton along the silk road,prove that the proton celts have ranged all over. Albeit, 1800 yrs before Christ, the umbrella terms to describe them have changed. Mutations take between 10 and 15,000 yrs to make. Changing what we call them does not change what they are. An example of this, is the Viking expansionism so to speak. Since 1000 AD, any persons that have the classic blond teutonic mutations no matter the cultural affinity(Dutch Boer, Scot-Irish southerners,Australians, etc.) Have the same geographic origin

        • PlumberofNazareth

          Yes, but coloration of the hair and eyes did not develop exclusively in Northwest European populations. We know for a fact that Kurds, Persians, Tajiks, and other Iranic groups developed such coloration independent of modern Europeans (see Evo, June 2009). Turkic groups also have pigment mutations resulting in colored hair and eyes that occur within nearly entirely homogeneous populations at rates of 5%(ish), meaning that it is likely the mutation is native to that population and not from European influence. Blondies in the Middle East and Central Asia are not that related to blondies from NW Europe, and it stands to reason that Ramses was a Middle Eastern blondie (or ginger, in this case) rather than a Celt.

          I’m not debating with you that blondies outside of the Old World are entirely NW European in origin. That certainly isn’t in doubt.

          • BonusGift

            If you want to be believed, try to be consistent on a basic level in a single posting. You contradict yourself by stating:
            (1) “I’m not debating with you that blondies outside of the Old World are entirely NW European in origin. That certainly isn’t in doubt.”
            2) ” … but coloration of the hair and eyes did not develop exclusively in Northwest European populations. … Blondies in the Middle East and Central Asia are not that related to blondies from NW Europe”.

            Statement #1 is empirically correct, while statement #2 is contradicted by statement #1 and appears to be based on your feelings. Do you or do you not accept that all blondes or redhead populations began originally from a European population? It is an either or question, and not a pick and choose cultural Marxist type answer. In short, let’s face it that the original Berbers, Egyptian pharaohs etc. where derived from Europeans not genetically mutated Trayvons or Arabs.

          • PlumberofNazareth

            ? “Old World” refers to Eurasia, not just Europe proper. I’m not really quite sure where your disagreement with me is otherwise. It is perfectly logical to believe that red/blonde-haired, blue-eyed types in Egypt derived from Iranic or Berber rather than proto-Celtic populations. We have indisputable evidence that Semites and proto-Kurds (both of whom have naturally-occurring pigment mutations) invaded Egypt in 1800 BC. With Occam’s Razor and all, it makes complete sense to believe that white-looking folks came into Egypt in this way, rather than through immigration/invasion by early iterations of Celts.

          • Martel

            According to DNA research performed by iGenea, King Tutankhamen shares his genetic profile with 70% of native Britons.

          • PlumberofNazareth

            Somehow I doubt the veracity of that. I can’t imagine Celts and Anglo-Saxons being that closely related to pedophilic, incestuous god-kings.

          • while you two smart folks duke it out, please allow me to pass this one on: Title is Ooops. An airplane was about to crash; there were 5 passengers on board, but only 4 parachutes. The first passenger, Hilary Clintonsaid, “I am planning to run for President, so Americans don’t want me to die.” She took the first pack and jumped out of the plane.

            The second passenger, Robert Menendez, said, “I’m a Senator, and and fighting for an emigration reform from the United States of America.” So he grabbed the second pack and jumped.
            The third passenger, Barack Obama said, “I am the President of the United States and I am the smartest ever in the history of
            our country, some even call me the ‘Anointed One.'” So he grabbed the pack next to him and jumped out.

            The fourth passenger, Marco Rubio said to the fifth passenger, a 10-year-old schoolgirl, “I have lived long enough
            and served as Senator from Florida. I will sacrifice my life and let you have the last parachute.”
            The little girl said, “That’s okay, Mr. Rubio. There’s a parachute left for you. You see, America ‘s smartest President took my backpack.”

  • Secret Tribunal

    The term “historic first” has been appropriated by Diversity worshippers as a weapon against White privilege.

    The White community isn’t allowed to be “historic first” because the term reflects leadership.

    Clovis “just must be the historic first” settlers in America, because they don’t represent the scourge of Whiteness.

  • So CAL Snowman

    Obviously the blacks from Egypt were here first in their speedboats and yachts. White racism reached back through the sands of time and erased their presence here.

    • Sick of it

      The blacks only took over Egypt at its most decadent and weakest point in history. They weren’t there first. Same thing happened throughout the middle ages to other white kingdoms in Africa.

  • Romulus

    Those are good links plumber of nazareth. You might also enjoy an excellent book called” The phoenician origin of britons,scots and anglo-saxons discovered by phoenician and sumerian inscriptions in britain by pre roman coins” by L. Austine waddell. Other sources are the atlas of christianity and the atlas of ancient battles. What i mean to demonstrate,is that conquering armies ixnay the males and rape the females thereby passing on their mutations instead of the original inhabitants. We now know that temujan,raped or bred with so many females,that his y chromosome can still be found inthe stan areas of the world.

    • PlumberofNazareth

      Many thanks for the suggestions. I’ll be sure to check that book out sometime.

    • freddy_hills

      There’s been enough DNA research to know what the British origins are. Blood of the Isles was written by Bryan Sykes, Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Oxford. There’s a summary on Wikipedia:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Sykes#Blood_of_the_Isles

      Still, I’ve heard of Waddell and put Makers of Civilization on my reading list. I’ve never read it myself but I’ve read it’s a mixed bag with some claims being reasonable but others going too far. I tend to be both open minded and skeptical about the kinds of claims he makes. Ultimately, I end up combining common sense and mainstream sources to determine whether there’s anything to them.

  • Mark

    Solutreans Are the Indigenous Americans DNA evidence traces their lineage
    back 17,000 years.

    Solutreans were the first people to inhabit the Americas; Asians came 1000’s
    of years later and committed genocide against the European people who were
    already here.

  • Funruffian

    Does anyone here remember the discovery of Kenniwik man? I think it was either in Utah or Idaho. Archaelogists unearthed skeletal remains of a 9,000 year old specimen with Caucasian bone structure (Diacyphalic). The governing Indian tribe of that area doesn’t want scientists to study Kenniwik man on the basis that it disrupts the sanctity of an anatomy they claim as their own. Perhaps they are fearful to entertain the idea that the first inhabitants of America were Europeans.

    • PlumberofNazareth

      “Perhaps they are fearful to entertain the idea that the first inhabitants of America were Europeans.”

      Sounds like Indians to me. I mean, if they aren’t the first Americans, then their only real claim to fame is gone. Without it, they’re just a bunch of alcoholic savages who run crummy casinos and who possess a cultural heritage of…..zilch.

  • Cirrus

    This article says scientists were able to use human DNA to determine how long ago genetic differences arose between humans.

    How can that be, if race is a social construct with no biological basis? If there are no meaningful genetic differences between human populations, how were scientists able to make a reliable measurement to determine a population exodus that happened tens of thousands of years ago?

    Why does the fecal death-cult called “multiculturalism” not get discarded immediately as the greatest lie ever foisted on humanity? Why are government, educational, and media groups so determined to sell ignorance and lies? Why aren’t scientists more honest? If multiculturalism is so accurate and reliable, why are its tenets repeatedly contradicted by science?

  • PDK/K-S S

    Contrary to both liberal and Amerindian revisionist history, white Europeans, the Solutreans, were the first humans to both set foot on and conquer this new continent, and further our white relatives were here many 1,000s of years before the Mongol Amerindians of today. Today’s Amerindian ancestors came after the old world invention of the bow and arrow, arming their ancestors with the new Mesolithic technology our white relatives were not armed with as they emigrated from the Paleolithic old world, and the invention of the bow and arrow is the hallmark feature of the birth of the Mesolithic time period, circa 15,000 to 10,000 years ago.

    The archeological record has found no evidence of Mongol Amerindians further back than 9,000 years ago while the archeological record for Solutreans is at least as far back as 16,900 years ago. Radio carbon dating is one of the means for dating.

    Therefore, by the white liberals and Amerindians own position of the land belonging to those who arrived first, this land belongs to whites of European decent. Thanks

    • Bossman

      So why by the time that Columbus arrived there were not any to be found? Why did they disappear if they had superior technology? Did they all interbreed too much with native women? What happened to them?

      • Dazed

        The same thing happened to them that should have happened to the Amerinds. They were decimated by barbaric tribes. That was kind of what happened in those days.

  • IstvanIN

    And it looks like we will be wiped out by Mongoloids once again.

    • Bardon Kaldian

      No need for such a pessimism.

    • Bossman

      There are over 1.3 billion people in China, they are all learning English and waiting patiently to come to America.

      • yes, Bossman. And that is the most profound and accurate statement on this blog. America will indeed be heavily inhabited by Chinese immigrants.

        • Bossman

          The thought of that depresses me greatly When that happens there won’t be much football, not much beer-drinking, not too many pop songs.

          • IstvanIN

            Well those should be every one’s top concerns.

  • Flytrap

    I see this as the noose getting ever so tighter around the cult of diversity and multiculturalism. Pretty soon the body will be kicking and gasping; denying that those ideas are mere fantasy will be impossible.

  • GeneticsareDestiny

    I am interested in finding out what the truth is on this matter, but it shouldn’t affect our claim to the U.S. and Canada, no matter what that truth is.

    Regardless of if whites or proto-Amerindians came here first, whites built the two best nations in the New World from the ground up. We can never forget that.

    If it turns out that the proto-Amerindians were here first, that’s fine, and I would support enlarging their reservations to a reasonable extent (or even making them independent nations), but it doesn’t change the basic realities about which race created these two countries.

    • Sick of it

      I know it’s unpopular to say, but Americans whose families have been here a long time are often part Indian. Not everyone popped off the boat from Europe in the 1890s on down. So really, we are the natives, regardless of any claims made by residents of various reservations/ghettos. Most of said tribes are descendants of the uncivilized barbarians who had to be displaced through force. Not all native tribes were that..backward?

      • Bossman

        I’ve been saying the same thing in this forum from the very beginning. The earliest Europeans who came to North America were overwhelmingly male who did not and could not bring any women with them. Crossing the Atlantic would have been pure horror for most white women. Those early Europeans co-inhabited and interbred with native women. The fur traders in Canada certainly did that, all those mountain men who went west certainly did that. As for South America, the situation is even more obvious. As soon as Cortez landed in Mexico, he married an Indian woman. As soon as Pizarro landed in Peru, he married an Indian woman. Maybe white men should all be thankful to the native women of the Americas for they made it possible for Europe to extend itself into the Americas.

        • Hal K

          If this is true then it will show up in mitochondrial DNA studies of white Americans. I don’t think it does very much. The Native American mtDNA haplogroups are A2, B2, C1, D1, and X. I don’t know any good reference for white American mtDNA haplogroup distributions, but one example is the “Cumberland Gap Mitochondrial DNA (mtdna)” page for FamilyTreeDNA. If you look at their results you will see that only a couple percent of the haplogroups are Native American.

          • Bossman

            Former president Bill Clinton is supposed to be 1/16 or 1/32 part Cherokee Indian. Would stuff like that show up in his DNA? My own personal belief is that all white Americans and Canadians whose ancestry goes back more than a couple hundred years in North America would have some connection to native America.

          • Jefferson

            Bill Clinton is not a Mestizo, he just wishes he was one. Bill Clinton looks like a typical pasty pink skin and blue eyed Northern European.

            Nobody would ever mistake Bill Clinton for a Mexican or a Guatemalan for example.

            Many White Americans like to claim to have a distant Amerindian ancestor in their family tree, so that they feel more exotic and not feel so White bread.

          • Bossman

            So you’re saying that is just one more lie coming from Bill Clinton?

          • Jefferson

            Yes that is what I am saying.

          • gemjunior

            Jefferson, most “exotics” would give a limb to be real “White bread,” probably you too. “Typical pasty pink skin?” Try to make it sound as ugly as you can, but we all know how much more attractive peaches and cream white skin is… I guess having a carpet of moss growing on your head would be better than that Brillo you’re stuck with. I guess you like greasy skin with that brillo stuck in it so you can plaster your curls and make designs in the grease.

          • Funruffian

            I totally agree with that. Clinton has zero Amerindian DNA. White Americans who claim to have Cherokee blood lie about that, because it saves them from looking like racists. If they claim to be part exotic or ethnic it absolves them from appearing to be a White racist. Clinton is a lying scumbag and i feel he is responsible for spearheading the multi-culturalist movement, especially in aiding and supporting Blacks. He openly stated that Whites and Blacks working side by side was a good thing. This was before i became politically astute and I knew it was BS back then.

          • Hal K

            My own personal belief is that all white Americans and Canadians whose ancestry goes back more than a couple hundred years in North America would have some connection to native America.

            My guess is that, if you look at old stock white Americans, more than half of them have American Indian ancestry. This is because most ancestral lines are neither maternal nor paternal. People have 128 great great great great great grandparents. Exactly one is on the maternal line, and one is on the paternal line.

            Still, if you want to know what percentage of all of the DNA comes from American Indian women, the mtDNA is a good indicator.

          • Bossman

            OK. I think I understand what you’re saying.

        • Jefferson

          So are you saying the vast majority of Americans before 1820 resembled south of the border Mestizos in phenotype ? B.S

          • Bossman

            First off, the people that you like to call Mestizos are more Indian than Spanish. Many of them are just Spanish-speaking Indians. Just think, blonde blue-eyed Kim Basinger is part Indian. Have you heard of a native woman called Pocahontas? Her descendants like to gather around from time to time. I’m sure they all look white. And another thing, before the early 1800s, most of what is now the U.S.A. was Indian and mestizo Spanish territory.

  • JDInSanDiego

    Sea levels are 300 feet higher today than they were before the last ice age ended about 11,000 years ago so a lot of the evidence that would support the Solutrean theory is underwater. See Graham Hancock’s “Fingerprints of the Gods.” He suggests that a comet impact quickly melted the ice sheets and that this is the origin of world wide flood “myths.”

    • MadMike

      I believe the Comet or Meteor strike happened around 12900 just as the earth was beginning to warm up and wipe out a lot of the North America Megafauna.

  • thoughtcrime

    So it is entirely possible to be backed up by science when we tell the Mestizos to shove it when they say “Deese eases mines lans! Goes back to Your Rope Greeeengo!” Besides they are only half Amerindian the other half is White Spanish. Thusly if they really want to get “pacific” (LOL) then we can say to them, if you want to continue to believe that you have a “birthright” to Amareeeka then you are only “entitled” to HALF of what you claim. And if you want all “whiteys” to head back to “your rope” then I suggest we take your white half with us…here is a hack saw, start cutting…may I suggest starting with your youngest child first. Watch them turn a darker shade of brown and sputter at your in gutteral “spanglish”. LOL

    Then hit them with more facts…the facts being uncovered such as the ones in this article. That it is highly likely that WE “greeengos” were the first here and that WE have a “birthright” to the land. If they accept that and want to argue that “joo leff so eets findars keepars…”. That is fine with me too. If they take that “logic” then I can hit them with the very simple fact that land changes hands through aggression that meets the needs of the strongest. Thus they lost the land fair and square when they were too stupid and outmatched to keep it.

    I see all these squat monster wetties to be criminal invaders and consider them enemy combatants. So I suggest the following:

    We set up machine gun towers every 50 yards or so and sniper towers every 100 yards, along with a long barbed wire electrified fence and of course a mine field on THEIR side of the border…the crossings would stop altogether. In fact, we can continue the thought..and bring ALL our armed forces home from overseas…then redeploy in the US and begin a round up of ALL illegals and their families (legal or not) and deport them at gun point, under pain of DEATH if they return. Then we arrest everyone of “latino” descent and determine their legality…if they are shown to be “fully integrated” they can stay but if we find a Mexican flag or any other flag in their home besides an American flag….they too are deported. If they have a poor grasp of Ingles…they are deported, legal or not.

    Next, we launch an ALL OUT ASSAULT on Mexico and Central America. We send in our Air Force first and bomb the cartels in to dust and ANY city that is controlled by them. Then we send in our ground troops supported by mechanized (tanks and helicopter gunships) and we invade. We leave a permanent garrison all the way down to the Panama Canal. We simply take over and turn the whole area into a huge military depot and camp.

    Why do we need to go to this extreme? The “latinos” have proven themselves a mortal threat to the US with their organizations such as La Raza, La Mecha and their Reconquista of Aztlan. They are now OPENLY saying the intend of launching a revolution against the US government and cease states in the US, Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico and Texas are just the start for them. You really think they will do this by voting? LAUGH! They are sending ARMED gangmembers (ground forces) across the border by the thousands every month. This is well documented!

    Hell, in Los Angeles they are waging an OPEN race war against blacks and are conducing an “ethnic cleansing” of all blacks in neighborhoods there. THIS IS FACT! THIS IS HAPPENING! THIS HAS TO STOP!!!!

    The myth of the lowly, poor Mexican man or woman who come here “looking for a better life” is a just that…A MYTH! They are NOT assimilating, they are NOT adopting our culture! They hate our culture and are simply here to drain our economy and murder our people and take or land! ALL FACT! TIME TO STOP IT!!!!

  • western hemisphere

    Technically the western hemisphere was “neutral” and both Europeans and Asians migrated to get there with the European caucasoid whites winning all the wars against the Asian mongoloid red yellows. Clearly this was ultimately a “race war” over a vast uninhabited neutral land and the winner was the white race. The loser was the red yellow race. Case settled.

    • Bossman

      Europeans were indeed able to extend themselves into the Americas. They had better technology and came from a more advanced culture than the natives.

  • Rosebud

    Regardless of who was here first, nothing erases the fact that the Indians were decimated. No amount of “historical evidence” will undo that atrocity. In that matter, might does NOT make right.

    • Jaego

      You benefit from the Conquest. If you can’t accept it, you are morally obligated to leave. Morality is for the living after all. If our Ancestors hadn’t conquered, you wouldn’t be here guilt tripping. What a luxury that is!

    • TeutonicKnight67

      It’s not an atrocity when it happens from disease, famine and inter-tribal warfare. Most Indians died from diseases unwittingly introduced by the Europeans, not by mass warfare. And yes, we all know about the smallpox laced blankets but that was a minor incident in the grand scheme of things.

    • Well boo-freakin’ hoo!

      Can you tell me any population, inhabiting any location, which did NOT “displace” the previous inhabitants of that place?

      BTW “Displace” is a fancy word for exterminate, enslave, conquer, and breed out of existence.

      The Europeans and Americans never did anything to the natives which they did not do to each other worse, and with even greater gusto.

      The “Natives” of America were a stone age nomadic culture, which was simply inferior to the technology of the invaders. Boo Hoo; High tech beats low tech.

      The worst thing that was done to the “Indians” was not even the Indian Wars but the creation of pseudo-nations, and creation of permanent dependency on the Federal Government.

  • Old Right

    There is a mitochondrial DNA haplogroup known, interestingly enough, as Haplogroup X. This particular genetic grouping has two areas of relative concentration – one in the northern Levant, and the other in the northeastern part of North America. It is rare in Europe, and virtually nonexistent in Siberia, where there should be evidence of it if the members had entered North America over the Bering Strait. The one tiny group that has been found there lacks the old genetic markers and is thought to represent a relatively recent migration from elsewhere in Asia.

    The North American component of Haplogroup X remains something of a mystery, the first being how they would have gotten there in the first place. Perhaps during one of the glacial maxima there was an ice bridge between Europe and North America, and these people migrated westward over it.

    However, since we all inherit our mitochondrial DNA is inherited from our mothers, this traces only the migration of the women. What of the men who surely accompanied them over? There appears to be no aboriginal European Y-DNA in that part of North America, only aboriginal Native American Y-DNA. Perhaps the best explanation is that the male population was exterminated by the Siberian invaders and the female population was conquered and enlsaved. This would account for Native American men who belong to Mitochondrial Haplogroup X and Y-DNA Haplogroup Q, which is the predominant Native American Y-DNA.

  • Paleoconn

    Regardless of who was here first, the terms ‘native’ and ‘aboriginal’ and ‘autochtonous’ when it comes to North American Indians, are invalid.