Solutreans Are Indigenous Americans. Crossing the Atlantic 20,000 Years Ago

task0778

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
5,742
Reaction score
2,378
Points
400
Location
Texas hill country
From Litwin's link: (Note: you can avoid the subscription by entering the CTRL-P to print the document and save it before the subscription ad pops up)

In a discovery that could rewrite the history of the Americas, archaeologists have found a number of stone tools dating back between 19,000 and 26,000 years, and bearing remarkable similarities to those made in Europe. All of the ancient implements were discovered along the north-east coast of the USA.

The tools could reassert the long dismissed and discredited claim that Europeans in the form of Christopher Columbus and his crew were the first to discover the New World.

Previous discoveries of tools have only been dated back to 15,000 years ago and prompted many archaeologists and historians to question claims that stone-age man managed to migrate to North America. But the striking resemblance in the way the primitive American tools were made to European ones dating from the same period now suggests a remarkable migration took place.

Adding to the weight of evidence is fresh analysis of stone knife unearthed in the US in 1971 that revealed it was made of French flint.

Professor Dennis Stanford from Washington's Smithsonian Institution, and Professor Bruce Bradley from Exeter University believe that the ancient Europeans travelled to North America across an Atlantic frozen over by the Ice Age.

During the height of the Ice Age, ice covered some three million square miles of the North Atlantic, providing a solid bridge between the two continents. Plentiful numbers of seal, penguins, seabirds and the now extinct great auk on the edge of the ice shelf could have provided the stone-age nomads with enough food to sustain them on their 1,500-mile walk.


I think it's highly likely that during the last ice age some 20,000-30,000 years ago, Europeans did find their way to North America, then maybe to Central and South America. Their settlements are now under a lot of water, and therefore not much evidence exists to support that claim. Doesn't make it false though.

FYI: Solutreans are named for the region of the Pyrenees where Solutrean-type tools were first found.
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
were dark skinned and not what one would consider white right?
many of them were white skinned, 2) one would consider white right? are you sure? )))
None of them were white skinned. That mutation didnt occur until about 8K years ago.
That said 16th century. You do realize how long ago 8k years was right?

" The Spanish Dominican missionary Gaspar de Carvajal first claimed meeting a white tribe of Amazonians, he wrote in his Account of the Recent Discovery of the Famous Grand River (1542) of a tribe of Amazonian women who were "very white and tall" who had "long hair, braided and wound about their heads".[1] British Journalist Harold T. Wilkins in his Mysteries of Ancient South America (1945) compiled further accounts of similar sightings of "White Indians" in the Amazon Rainforest from the 16th to 19th century by explorers and Jesuits. "
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
From Litwin's link: (Note: you can avoid the subscription by entering the CTRL-P to print the document and save it before the subscription ad pops up)

In a discovery that could rewrite the history of the Americas, archaeologists have found a number of stone tools dating back between 19,000 and 26,000 years, and bearing remarkable similarities to those made in Europe. All of the ancient implements were discovered along the north-east coast of the USA.

The tools could reassert the long dismissed and discredited claim that Europeans in the form of Christopher Columbus and his crew were the first to discover the New World.

Previous discoveries of tools have only been dated back to 15,000 years ago and prompted many archaeologists and historians to question claims that stone-age man managed to migrate to North America. But the striking resemblance in the way the primitive American tools were made to European ones dating from the same period now suggests a remarkable migration took place.

Adding to the weight of evidence is fresh analysis of stone knife unearthed in the US in 1971 that revealed it was made of French flint.

Professor Dennis Stanford from Washington's Smithsonian Institution, and Professor Bruce Bradley from Exeter University believe that the ancient Europeans travelled to North America across an Atlantic frozen over by the Ice Age.

During the height of the Ice Age, ice covered some three million square miles of the North Atlantic, providing a solid bridge between the two continents. Plentiful numbers of seal, penguins, seabirds and the now extinct great auk on the edge of the ice shelf could have provided the stone-age nomads with enough food to sustain them on their 1,500-mile walk.


I think it's highly likely that during the last ice age some 20,000-30,000 years ago, Europeans did find their way to North America, then maybe to Central and South America. Their settlements are now under a lot of water, and therefore not much evidence exists to support that claim. Doesn't make it false though.

FYI: Solutreans are named for the region of the Pyrenees where Solutrean-type tools were first found.




" Most of us think of Europe as the ancestral home of white people. But a new study shows that pale skin, as well as other traits such as tallness and the ability to digest milk as adults, arrived in most of the continent relatively recently. The work, presented here last week at the 84th annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, offers dramatic evidence of recent evolution in Europe and shows that most modern Europeans don’t look much like those of 8000 years ago "
 
OP
Litwin

Litwin

Silver Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
6,744
Reaction score
428
Points
95
Location
GDL&Sweden
were dark skinned and not what one would consider white right?
many of them were white skinned, 2) one would consider white right? are you sure? )))
None of them were white skinned. That mutation didnt occur until about 8K years ago.
That said 16th century. You do realize how long ago 8k years was right?

" The Spanish Dominican missionary Gaspar de Carvajal first claimed meeting a white tribe of Amazonians, he wrote in his Account of the Recent Discovery of the Famous Grand River (1542) of a tribe of Amazonian women who were "very white and tall" who had "long hair, braided and wound about their heads".[1] British Journalist Harold T. Wilkins in his Mysteries of Ancient South America (1945) compiled further accounts of similar sightings of "White Indians" in the Amazon Rainforest from the 16th to 19th century by explorers and Jesuits. "
did i prove you that some of American Indians were white skinned?
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
were dark skinned and not what one would consider white right?
many of them were white skinned, 2) one would consider white right? are you sure? )))
None of them were white skinned. That mutation didnt occur until about 8K years ago.
That said 16th century. You do realize how long ago 8k years was right?

" The Spanish Dominican missionary Gaspar de Carvajal first claimed meeting a white tribe of Amazonians, he wrote in his Account of the Recent Discovery of the Famous Grand River (1542) of a tribe of Amazonian women who were "very white and tall" who had "long hair, braided and wound about their heads".[1] British Journalist Harold T. Wilkins in his Mysteries of Ancient South America (1945) compiled further accounts of similar sightings of "White Indians" in the Amazon Rainforest from the 16th to 19th century by explorers and Jesuits. "
did i prove you that some of American Indians were white skinned?
Thats not what we were discussing even if its true. Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans. My point is that any stone age Europeans claiming to be here first were not white people.


 
OP
Litwin

Litwin

Silver Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
6,744
Reaction score
428
Points
95
Location
GDL&Sweden
Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans.
"Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans." any link? how could they do so ? with which African empires ? man you are so race - fixed, are you living in USA? which city?
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans.
"Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans." any link? how could they do so ? with which African empires ? man you are so race - fixed, are you living in USA? which city?

What does my location have to do with the facts were are discussing?
 
OP
Litwin

Litwin

Silver Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
6,744
Reaction score
428
Points
95
Location
GDL&Sweden
Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans.
"Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans." any link? how could they do so ? with which African empires ? man you are so race - fixed, are you living in USA? which city?

What does my location have to do with the facts were are discussing?
" “Africa and the Discovery of America,” he explains that Columbus noted in his journal that the Native Americans confirmed “black skinned people had come from the south-east in boats, trading in gold-tipped spears. " you must be joking, take care you need a help , you are really racist
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans.
"Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans." any link? how could they do so ? with which African empires ? man you are so race - fixed, are you living in USA? which city?

What does my location have to do with the facts were are discussing?
" “Africa and the Discovery of America,” he explains that Columbus noted in his journal that the Native Americans confirmed “black skinned people had come from the south-east in boats, trading in gold-tipped spears. " you must be joking, take care you need a help , you are really racist
I guess you dont know what lies south east of Santa Domingo? Africa. If you read further you will find that the spear tips were taken back to europe and confirmed that they were made from the exact same alloy in the exact same percentages as the Ghanaian spear tips. Whats your excuse now?

"the natives of Hispanola (now Haiti) came to me and told me that Blacks (Afrikans) had come from the South and Southeast trading with them in gold-tip medal spears. They (Afrikans) came in large boats.'

Columbus then became very skeptical and sent two samples of these spears the Afrikans used to be assayed in Spain.

The European experts in Spain found that these Afrikan-made spears had the same indetical ratio of gold, silver and copper alloys as those spears found in Guinea, West Afrika. "
 
OP
Litwin

Litwin

Silver Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2017
Messages
6,744
Reaction score
428
Points
95
Location
GDL&Sweden
"the natives of Hispanola (now Haiti)
thats why all Haitins are black today ? LOL, did "Guinea" have white water fleet? man you are black king of conspiracies , but i like your (non academical ) links and posts , i love Geography and History
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
"the natives of Hispanola (now Haiti)
thats why all Haitins are black today ? LOL, did "Guinea" have white water fleet? man you are black king of conspiracies , but i like your (non academical ) links and posts , i love Geography and History
Youre broken down with no intelligent reply to offer. Thanks for playing.
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
Too bad its a failed hypothesis. :lol:


"The Solutrean hypothesis is challenged by large gaps in time between the Clovis and Solutrean eras, a lack of evidence of Solutrean seafaring, lack of specific Solutrean features and tools in Clovis technology, the difficulties of the route and other issues.[11][22]

Arthur J. Jelinek, an anthropologist who took note of similarities between Solutrean and Clovis styles in a 1971 study, observed that the great geographical and temporal separation of the two cultures made a direct connection unlikely, since the dates of the proposed transitional sites and the Solutrean period in Europe only overlap at the extremes. He also argued that crossing the Atlantic with the means available at the time would have been difficult, if not impossible. The opinion is shared by Lawrence G. Straus, who wrote that "there are no representations of boats and no evidence whatsoever either of seafaring or of the ability to make a living mainly or solely from the ocean during the Solutrean".[11] Straus excavated Solutrean artifacts along what is now a coastline in Cantabria, which was some ways inland during the Solutrean epoch. He found seashells and estuarine fish at the sites, but no evidence that deep sea resources had been exploited. Advocates state that the historic coastlines of western Europe and eastern North America during the Last Glacial Maximum are now under water and thus, evidence of Solutrean-era seafaring may have been obliterated or submerged.

Another challenge to the hypothesis involves the paucity of non-technological evidence of a kind we would expect to find transmitted from east to west; cave paintings of a kind associated with the Cave of Altamira in Spain, for example, are without close parallel in the New World.[23] In response, Bradley and Stanford contend that it was "a very specific subset of the Solutrean who formed the parent group that adapted to a maritime environment and eventually made it across the north Atlantic ice-front to colonize the east coast of the Americas" and that this group may not have exhibited the full range of Solutrean cultural traits.[24] A carved piece of bone depicting a mammoth found near the Vero man site in Florida was dated between 20,000–13,000 BP. It is described as possibly being the oldest art object yet found in the Americas and may provide some evidence for the Solutrean hypothesis.[25] Art historian Barbara Olins has compared the Vero carving to "Franco-Cantabrian" drawings and engravings of mammoths. She notes that the San of southern Africa developed a realistic manner of representing animals similar to the "Franco-Cantabrian" style, hinting that such a style could have evolved in North America independently.[26]

"
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
61,932
Reaction score
13,817
Points
2,220
Adding to the weight of evidence is fresh analysis of stone knife unearthed in the US in 1971 that revealed it was made of French flint.
This is such cool beans. I remember seeing a show on Nat Geo or someplace years ago that talked about arrow heads or knife points found in --- I think Florida? -- that were dead wringers for the Clovis points of western Europe. The question was how they got to the Eastern seaboard.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
61,932
Reaction score
13,817
Points
2,220
Too bad its a failed hypothesis. :lol:


"The Solutrean hypothesis is challenged by large gaps in time between the Clovis and Solutrean eras, a lack of evidence of Solutrean seafaring, lack of specific Solutrean features and tools in Clovis technology, the difficulties of the route and other issues.[11][22]

Arthur J. Jelinek, an anthropologist who took note of similarities between Solutrean and Clovis styles in a 1971 study, observed that the great geographical and temporal separation of the two cultures made a direct connection unlikely, since the dates of the proposed transitional sites and the Solutrean period in Europe only overlap at the extremes. He also argued that crossing the Atlantic with the means available at the time would have been difficult, if not impossible. The opinion is shared by Lawrence G. Straus, who wrote that "there are no representations of boats and no evidence whatsoever either of seafaring or of the ability to make a living mainly or solely from the ocean during the Solutrean".[11] Straus excavated Solutrean artifacts along what is now a coastline in Cantabria, which was some ways inland during the Solutrean epoch. He found seashells and estuarine fish at the sites, but no evidence that deep sea resources had been exploited. Advocates state that the historic coastlines of western Europe and eastern North America during the Last Glacial Maximum are now under water and thus, evidence of Solutrean-era seafaring may have been obliterated or submerged.

Another challenge to the hypothesis involves the paucity of non-technological evidence of a kind we would expect to find transmitted from east to west; cave paintings of a kind associated with the Cave of Altamira in Spain, for example, are without close parallel in the New World.[23] In response, Bradley and Stanford contend that it was "a very specific subset of the Solutrean who formed the parent group that adapted to a maritime environment and eventually made it across the north Atlantic ice-front to colonize the east coast of the Americas" and that this group may not have exhibited the full range of Solutrean cultural traits.[24] A carved piece of bone depicting a mammoth found near the Vero man site in Florida was dated between 20,000–13,000 BP. It is described as possibly being the oldest art object yet found in the Americas and may provide some evidence for the Solutrean hypothesis.[25] Art historian Barbara Olins has compared the Vero carving to "Franco-Cantabrian" drawings and engravings of mammoths. She notes that the San of southern Africa developed a realistic manner of representing animals similar to the "Franco-Cantabrian" style, hinting that such a style could have evolved in North America independently.[26]

"
New theories always take a long time to flesh out. I wouldn't give up on it yet. Most of where they lived is now underwater, so we may never find sure evidence. The video Litwin put up that was about DNA studies shows a very high percentage of European DNA in northeastern Native tribes. Sure, there was some intermingling with Europeans, but not THAT much. I was looking at a map of the furthest extent of the last ice age, though, and they weren't kidding about "the difficulty of the route." I will be interested if they find more evidence that this may have happened.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
61,932
Reaction score
13,817
Points
2,220
were dark skinned and not what one would consider white right?
many of them were white skinned, 2) one would consider white right? are you sure? )))
None of them were white skinned. That mutation didnt occur until about 8K years ago.
That said 16th century. You do realize how long ago 8k years was right?

" The Spanish Dominican missionary Gaspar de Carvajal first claimed meeting a white tribe of Amazonians, he wrote in his Account of the Recent Discovery of the Famous Grand River (1542) of a tribe of Amazonian women who were "very white and tall" who had "long hair, braided and wound about their heads".[1] British Journalist Harold T. Wilkins in his Mysteries of Ancient South America (1945) compiled further accounts of similar sightings of "White Indians" in the Amazon Rainforest from the 16th to 19th century by explorers and Jesuits. "
did i prove you that some of American Indians were white skinned?
Thats not what we were discussing even if its true. Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans. My point is that any stone age Europeans claiming to be here first were not white people.


Who gives a shit what color they were?
This is such fascinating stuff. Can't we leave race out of anything?
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
61,932
Reaction score
13,817
Points
2,220
Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans.
"Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans." any link? how could they do so ? with which African empires ? man you are so race - fixed, are you living in USA? which city?

What does my location have to do with the facts were are discussing?
" “Africa and the Discovery of America,” he explains that Columbus noted in his journal that the Native Americans confirmed “black skinned people had come from the south-east in boats, trading in gold-tipped spears. " you must be joking, take care you need a help , you are really racist
I guess you dont know what lies south east of Santa Domingo? Africa. If you read further you will find that the spear tips were taken back to europe and confirmed that they were made from the exact same alloy in the exact same percentages as the Ghanaian spear tips. Whats your excuse now?

"the natives of Hispanola (now Haiti) came to me and told me that Blacks (Afrikans) had come from the South and Southeast trading with them in gold-tip medal spears. They (Afrikans) came in large boats.'

Columbus then became very skeptical and sent two samples of these spears the Afrikans used to be assayed in Spain.

The European experts in Spain found that these Afrikan-made spears had the same indetical ratio of gold, silver and copper alloys as those spears found in Guinea, West Afrika. "
So they traded here but none of them stayed, even to operate trading posts? They made that long arduous journey by ship to sell their spears and then just turned around and left, never to return? There don't seem to be records of any black native americans that I recall, at least not 'til we brought slaves over. Or are there? Besides this instance of Afrikan spears being mentioned?
 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans.
"Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans." any link? how could they do so ? with which African empires ? man you are so race - fixed, are you living in USA? which city?

What does my location have to do with the facts were are discussing?
" “Africa and the Discovery of America,” he explains that Columbus noted in his journal that the Native Americans confirmed “black skinned people had come from the south-east in boats, trading in gold-tipped spears. " you must be joking, take care you need a help , you are really racist
I guess you dont know what lies south east of Santa Domingo? Africa. If you read further you will find that the spear tips were taken back to europe and confirmed that they were made from the exact same alloy in the exact same percentages as the Ghanaian spear tips. Whats your excuse now?

"the natives of Hispanola (now Haiti) came to me and told me that Blacks (Afrikans) had come from the South and Southeast trading with them in gold-tip medal spears. They (Afrikans) came in large boats.'

Columbus then became very skeptical and sent two samples of these spears the Afrikans used to be assayed in Spain.

The European experts in Spain found that these Afrikan-made spears had the same indetical ratio of gold, silver and copper alloys as those spears found in Guinea, West Afrika. "
So they traded here but none of them stayed, even to operate trading posts? They made that long arduous journey by ship to sell their spears and then just turned around and left, never to return? There don't seem to be records of any black native americans that I recall, at least not 'til we brought slaves over. Or are there? Besides this instance of Afrikan spears being mentioned?
There are a couple of more references from european explorers mentioning seeing "Mandingos" in the americas. There is even some Black people that have proven their ancestors were here before europeans ever came here. One such person is even recognized by the UN. If youre really interested in knowing more about it there is a book called "They Came Before Columbus". I found out about this book due to meeting a young lady I thought was African but it turned out she was classified as an Indian or native of a south american country on the Atlantic. She suspected her ancestry was from Mali due to the legends the elders in her village would tell about sailing from Africa.

 

Asclepias

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
105,726
Reaction score
12,637
Points
2,195
Location
Breathing rarified air.
were dark skinned and not what one would consider white right?
many of them were white skinned, 2) one would consider white right? are you sure? )))
None of them were white skinned. That mutation didnt occur until about 8K years ago.
That said 16th century. You do realize how long ago 8k years was right?

" The Spanish Dominican missionary Gaspar de Carvajal first claimed meeting a white tribe of Amazonians, he wrote in his Account of the Recent Discovery of the Famous Grand River (1542) of a tribe of Amazonian women who were "very white and tall" who had "long hair, braided and wound about their heads".[1] British Journalist Harold T. Wilkins in his Mysteries of Ancient South America (1945) compiled further accounts of similar sightings of "White Indians" in the Amazon Rainforest from the 16th to 19th century by explorers and Jesuits. "
did i prove you that some of American Indians were white skinned?
Thats not what we were discussing even if its true. Columbus wrote in his journal that the natives said they were trading with Africans. My point is that any stone age Europeans claiming to be here first were not white people.


Who gives a shit what color they were?
This is such fascinating stuff. Can't we leave race out of anything?
I do. This gives the correct perspective and yes its fascinating but dont think the OP isnt trying to push a narrative.. The OP is trying to claim white people were here in the US first which simply isnt true. If this was merely a fact finding thing for him he wouldnt have gotten upset when I showed that the mutation for light/white skin hadn't even occurred when this supposedly took place.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top