Replies

Personally, I have my own own opinion that they have arrived in the past in the Americas from multiple different origins. I believe that most all theories are the truth, not just one. I firmly believe that the original Celtic tribes of Northern Europe aren't given enough credit for their explorations of the world, either from the Northern Atlantic regions, or from the Far East to South America. The world of historians in the Americas has a huge tendency to be ethnocentric about who got here first, as if there is some form of competition in a race to get here. I believe there is the possibility that all of them may be true at once. Who EXACTLY are the pre-Clovis? We'll know soon. FOR SURE! The directions of differing fields of science will cross each other and bring about revelations in the next few years, I can feel it. The answers aren't far off. It wouldn't surprise me if the original Celtic tribes didn't originally come from advanced civilizations existing on the continental shelves of the world and displaced by the rising oceans after the melting of the glaciers, but at the current time that sort of thinking would be considered scifi. It also wouldn't surprise me if what we end up finding out about who we think they were now and where they came from in the distant past is completely rewritten. What I mean is this, If they were originally an advanced civilization that existed within the English Channel, North Sea region, and were obliterated during the massive floods that occurred after the last ice age, they would be in turn relocated to higher ground, and nowadays we might speculate that they actually originated from that higher ground and our ideas of who they REALLY are would only be based upon our limited knowledge of what we currently know, AND, we would think that their DNA markers are original, when in fact they may just be evolved from an even EARLIER people of which we have no reference material to base conclusions about DNA lineages on. Understand what I mean? (sorry for the run-on sentence..lol.) If this turns out to be the case, or something similar, then this thought-thread opens Pandora's box, in a sense. In other words, are there other situations like this that occurred around the world that the native peoples of the continental shelf didn't survive the rising ocean levels, except in small groups? I suspect that the pre-Clovis cultures could very well be much more diverse than the Clovis, but due to the chaotic world that they lived in they had a very hard time maintaining any existence. With the undersea explorations going on nowadays in search of evidence of these ancient peoples, we should start to piece things together soon. Now, these are just thoughts that I have, and I don't expect that I'm entirely correct about them, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this ends up being the case. The pre-Clovis artifacts I have personally seen have shown me that these people are totally different than the Clovis. I mean, not even distant cousins. There's a HUGE piece of our history missing about those times and I believe the two civilizations aren't hardly related at all. Bear in mind please, these thoughts of mine are only my personal opinions, and do not reflect the mainstream beliefs of most of my peers in the field, so far. I believe most of the missing answers are laying out there somewhere on one of the continental shelves. I personally think there's a few answers in caves located on the tops of mountain ranges around the world, too. Especially in those regions that were mostly covered by glaciers during the ice ages. It just seems to make sense to me. We'll see. Both are frontiers, in a sense, in the realm of archeology. And both we know almost nothing about yet. I think that the field of archeology is still in its infancy, so to speak. Things they are a-changin’, though.