[blam]

"Tried the "Who Was First" site---thanks for the link. Funny how it talks about how "some" people have claimed the reconstruction of Kennewick Man had "Eurasian" [sic!] features, as though whoever wrote the copy on the site couldn't bring himself (or herself) to write "European"!"

"Euroasian" may be a correct defination. He is believed to have been closely related to the Ainu (presently living in Japan) who are believed to be descendents of the Jomon.(all of Asia) Kennewick Man had dental features like Europeans and unlike present day American Indians or most Orientals. Kennewick Man and those like him were in North America, at least, 3-4,000 thousand years before the present day American Indians showed up in the skeletal record. (REF: Ancient Encounters (Kennewick Man) by James C. Chatters)

[Map Kernow]

Euroasian" may be a correct defination. He is believed to have been closely related to the Ainu (presently living in Japan) who are believed to be descendents of the Jomon.(all of Asia) Kennewick Man had dental features like Europeans and unlike present day American Indians or most Orientals. Kennewick Man and those like him were in North America, at least, 3-4,000 thousand years before the present day American Indians showed up in the skeletal record. (REF: Ancient Encounters (Kennewick Man) by James C. Chatters)

Thanks again. Let me reciprocate by recommending a work by one of the great comparative and historical linguists of our time, Joseph H. Greenberg, "Indo-European and its nearest relatives," put out by Stanford Univ. Press a couple of years ago. Briefly, his thesis, which he backs up with intriguing and often brilliant examples, is that Indo-European (the language family that includes English, German, the Latin languages like French, Italian and Spanish, Russian and the Slavic languages, Irish and the Celtic languages, Armenian, Greek, Persian, Hindi and the other languages of North India) in turn belongs to a language "super-family" he calls "Eurasiatic." This proposed family would consist of, in addition to Indo-European, the Uralic languages (Hungarian, Finnish, Samoyed, etc.), Altaic (Turkish, Mongolian, the Siberian Tungusic languages, etc.), Chukotian (Chukchi, a isolated language spoken in extreme northeastern Siberia, and its related languages there), Nivkh or Gilyak (an extremely isolated language family spoken in the lower Amur Valley and parts of Sakhalin), Japanese, Korean, and *AINU*, and the (New World) Eskimo-Aleutian languages!!! (As a footnote, Greenberg's thesis is not an entirely original one, and he extensively acknowledges his indebtedness to other linguists who have investigated what Holgar Pedersen named the "Nostratic thesis" in the early 20th century---after Latin "nostrates"="our homeboys"---but in my opinion, Greenberg makes the best case for the thesis).

Now, can you beat that? :)