Folklore is not a reliable evidence of ancient origins. Consider that ancient campfires have been dated jusyt south of Pittsburgh at 16,000 years BP. That means that the makers, presumably Indians, were around, and living not far from the glaciers. They should have then seen the glaciers, and also mammoths and saber-tooth tigers, and yet we have nothing in Am. Indian folklore about these things. It is just too long ago for a folk story to hold up. It is about 800 generations! After just a few generations, nobody would believe grandpa's descriptions of a heap big ice sheet, or of mammoths, once they were gone.
Folklore has limits, definite limits.
That means that the makers, presumably Indians, were around, and living not far from the glaciers. They should have then seen the glaciers, and also mammoths and saber-tooth tigers, and yet we have nothing in Am. Indian folklore about these things. It is just too long ago for a folk story to hold up.I do agree, that's a very long time for folklore to endure regarding stuff that is around a long time (iow, stuff that doesn't change much). However, "presumably Indians" may be an unwarranted assumption, in which case any folklore wouldn't exist because their ancestors were not yet around. :')