Clovis first, Salutrians, spearpoints

[pipelineaudio]

The idea that some of the early settlers of America may have come from europe really fascinates me. I've seen some neat stuff on the science channel, but not much else.

When I see it brought up in forums it quickly turns into "OMFGZORZ you dare to compare european speartips with American ones? You are a NAZI!"

Without stepping on any PC toes ( I don't even understand how in the world this can get political but nevermind ), where can I find out what the latest on this subject is?

[Travis]

OMFGZORZ you dare to compare Asian speartips with American ones? You are a Communist!

[Dancing David]

Um, the real issue is the dating of the spear points, some people feel that the americas were settled earlier than others.

But the largest possibility is that asian/artic peoples are the ones that settled the americas.

Other than Vinland and the portuguese fisherman.

[ponderingturtle]

Genetic testing has shown that at the least most native americans stemed from Asian decent.

[pipelineaudio]

Genetic testing has shown that at the least most native americans stemed from Asian decent.

Yeah from what I saw there were 4 lines of mitochondrial DNA markers, with 3 of them closely matching lines still in the siberian area accounting for 99% or more of the indigenous populace. The fourth line seemed to be from southern france from 16,000 years ago or so, and one claim was that is where the clovis technology had come from while the asian peoples had a very different bone tech spearpoint with many tiny rocks embedded in them.

I don't know how the arrowheads I find around here fit into this. They don't look anything like that clovis stuff, but they're definitely not bone. They're often translucent black rocks, like Pele's tears or obsidian or something

[ponderingturtle]

Yeah from what I saw there were 4 lines of mitochondrial DNA markers, with 3 of them closely matching lines still in the siberian area accounting for 99% or more of the indigenous populace. The fourth line seemed to be from southern france from 16,000 years ago or so, and one claim was that is where the clovis technology had come from while the asian peoples had a very different bone tech spearpoint with many tiny rocks embedded in them.

I don't know how the arrowheads I find around here fit into this. They don't look anything like that clovis stuff, but they're definitely not bone. They're often translucent black rocks, like Pele's tears or obsidian or something

I saw that claimed on NOVA, so it seems pretty reputable, but I wouldn't put that much stock in it. I don't know how well reproduced the finding was.

[Marduk]

I saw that claimed on NOVA, so it seems pretty reputable, but I wouldn't put that much stock in it. I don't know how well reproduced the finding was.

the Nat geo genographic project proved that the 4 main mtdna haplogroups that make up Native Americans are A,B,C,D, with a later smattering of X
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html
click on genetic markers (bottom right)
these are all east asian lineages.
you don't have to rely on NOVA
I wouldn't
;)

[pipelineaudio]

The lines on that map make it seem like the Salutrian technology could have gone all the way east from france to asia then to the americas instead of just going west. Is that the more evidenced and accepted version?

[Marduk]

from wiki
In short, the idea of a Clovis-Solutrean link remains rather controversial and does not enjoy wide acceptance. The 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 in Clovis technology, and other issues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean#The_Solutrean_Hypothesis_in_North_Americ an_archaeology
;)

oh and its "Solutrean"

[ponderingturtle]

the Nat geo genographic project proved that the 4 main mtdna haplogroups that make up Native Americans are A,B,C,D, with a later smattering of X
https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html
click on genetic markers (bottom right)
these are all east asian lineages.
you don't have to rely on NOVA
I wouldn't
;)

Well except for X, which is mostly European. They just show the line going east but don't have evidence for X in Siberia based on your own link.

[Marduk]

Well except for X, which is mostly European. They just show the line going east but don't have evidence for X in Siberia based on your own link.

the genographic project is simplified for practical reasons
theres a very enlightening thread on X here, which explains all the subclades
http://www.hallofmaat.com/read.php?1,440769,440769#msg-440769
the thread starter is Bernard Ortiz De Montellano who is professor of anthropology at Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.

wiki also has an easier to understand page on X here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_X

;)

[pipelineaudio]

Awesome! Thank you, that's what I was looking for, but Travis' play on words was pretty kick ass and made the thread worth it early on :)

[Dancing David]

The lines on that map make it seem like the Salutrian technology could have gone all the way east from france to asia then to the americas instead of just going west. Is that the more evidenced and accepted version?

The dispersal of tool kits is interesting but rarely indicative of who actually made them. There are reasons to want to have 'leaf points' but a lot of it depends on the material at hand.

[Marduk]

I have 2 peer reviewed genetics papers on Native American haplogroup lineages, if anyone wants a copy just message me your e mail address
;)