Posted on 02/11/2019 8:04:08 PM PST by SunkenCiv
The Bering land bridge was exposed at various times over an almost three million year period, when wide scale glaciation lowered sea levels by as much as 150 metres. The land bridge was part of "Beringia," which refers to the stretch of land between present day Siberia and Yukon Territory. It's been home to woolly mammoths, steppe bison and humans.
Jeff Bond, a geologist with Yukon Geological Survey in Whitehorse, has produced a map showing what Beringia looked like 18,000 years ago. At that time, much of the earth was glaciated, but Beringia remained predominantly ice-free due to its arid climate...
Bond said the data are accurate down to about one square kilometre in most places... He said some areas have a 100 square metre resolution...
"I think these waterways would be very significant in terms of campsites, places which would have maybe impeded peoples' migration or dispersion across the land bridge."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbc.ca ...
"I think these waterways would be very significant in terms of campsites, places which would have maybe impeded peoples' migration or dispersion across the land bridge."
Landlubbers.
150 meters - 492 feet.
That’s a lot of land! Remember, even in the warm tropics, shrunken in latitude for much, the sea was far below where it is now. Who knows what secrets from then lies on the bottom of the ocean?
Thank You for posting SunkenCiv.
Alaska Ping.
I’ve never been a fan of the land bridge theory for human colonization of the Americas. But there seems to be a whole lot of people who are deeply invested in it.
Oceanic or coastal migration makes far more sense, especially for fishermen following their catch, vs trying to chase (possible) herd migrations in some of the most difficult terrain around.
:^) Bet he loved snacking on humans, plus, they came with a cooler to keep 'em fresh after the kill.
My pleasure.
I wholeheartedly agree!
So whose fault is it that we lost all that land to rising water?
Fuching eco nazis.
interesting
I think they came every way possible.
I wonder if we can get reparations for those people way before us making the seas rise.
Whose fault??? Well, ours of course the totalitarian left would say. Let’s get that guilty feeling going.
I think both are possible. One does not exclude the other. Ancients would have persued whatever method suited their technology and skills.
My distant cousins, the Paleo-Eskimo, got covered by the more recent coat of paint, and that was long after the "land bridge" was so long gone it had vanished from folklore, so, I'd say, they primarly got here by water, and there were a lot of "theys" involved, a sort of sine wave of intensity, of different arrivals.
I'll even go so far as to say that we don't know nearly enough about the depth of prehistory and primatology in the Americas, important to know when one is a multiregionalist.
dwarka site:freerepublic.com (for example):
;^) We gained all that land thanks to falling water, and that's not a frequent phenomenon.
I didn’t think this should be a good standalone topic:
Archaeologists Find Evidence Of Human Habitation In The Rockies Stretching Back 9,000 Years
By Rae Ellen Bichell
https://www.kunc.org/post/archaeologists-find-evidence-human-habitation-rockies-stretching-back-9000-years
Cool
I favor the coastal route, with strings of campsites up the rivers. This would have allowed those living on the arctic steppe desert to access both the herds at choke points, aquatic resources, and the greater vegetation present near the rivers.
The people living near the river mouths would have had usable boats, even if I doubt that they could or would willingly travel more than 3 days by boat before camping on land. This is due to the ability to store potable water and average time between storms.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.