# Clovis Primacy Disputed



## j d worthington (Feb 23, 2007)

Experts doubt Clovis people were first in Americas - Yahoo! News

The story is from Reuters, by Will Dunham, datedlined Thurs., Feb. 22, and titled "Experts doubt Clovis people were first in Americas"...


----------



## littlemissattitude (Feb 24, 2007)

And about time, too, as far as I'm concerned. 

Seriously, thanks for pointing this article out, j. d.  Always interesting to see another skirmish in the "how early" dispute over the peopling of the Western Hemisphere.


----------



## clovis-man (Oct 13, 2007)

I'm new to these forums and am just now getting around to exploring some of the less prominent subjects. Due to my user name (a double entendre because of my education in anthropology) I just had to take a look at this thread. Unfortunately, the link in the first post is now non-functioning. But there is certainly plenty of controversy about the dating and authenticity of archeological finds in the Americas.

For a provocative look at many of the issues at hand, including repatriation, I would suggest reading the book by my old grad school classmate Dave Thomas, "Skull Wars".

Here's a link to some pages:

Skull Wars: Kennewick Man ... - Google Book Search

Regards,

Jim


----------



## j d worthington (Oct 13, 2007)

Hi, Jim. That's why I put in the title, author, etc., information... so that, if the initial link is no longer functional, and someone wishes, they can track the story by putting any of those in. In this case, here's another link for this one, if you'd like to read the article:

Experts doubt Clovis people were first in Americas | Science | Reuters


----------



## clovis-man (Oct 13, 2007)

j. d. worthington said:


> In this case, here's another link for this one, if you'd like to read the article:
> 
> Experts doubt Clovis people were first in Americas | Science | Reuters


 
Thanks. Yes, this pretty much parallels a lot of what Dave Thomas and others have been saying based on newer info (data gathered over the last 10 years or so). And this is what has fueled much of the repatriation debate, i.e., the fact that it is becoming more and more difficult to reliably assign any ethnic lineage based on fossil evidence.

Regards,

Jim


----------



## j d worthington (Oct 13, 2007)

I'm not terribly surprised... though gathering the evidence is certainly fascinating. I've a feeling we're a long way from getting to the bottom of it all, and I expect we'll find a lot more connections ethnically as we go along....


----------



## Overread (Oct 13, 2007)

I'm tired and hungry ATM, so I won't say much yet, but this is not new news. The basic argument has been around for some time, but my lecturer summed it up with this:
"the clovis people theory in america is like a religion, there are those who either do or do not beleave in them being the first"
This gets linked then to those in each group throwing slander at each other - though it moves more from the clovis beleavers to the non-beleavers. However he did say that the mounting evidence is begining to beat out all but the most die-hard clovis beleavers, though it has been an uphill struggle.


----------



## clovis-man (Oct 13, 2007)

Overread said:


> "the clovis people theory in america is like a religion, there are those who either do or do not beleave in them being the first"


 
As much as I would like to believe that "I" was first, I gave that idea up a long time ago. I really would suggest that anyone interested in the subject read "Skull Wars". First published in 1999, it is a great read with information and ideas that are still current today. Chapters 15 (Breakthrough at Folsom), 16 (Busting the Clovis Barrier) and 17 (What Modern Archaeologists think about the Earliest Americans) cover the issues well.

But I do think "I" make the very nicest scrapers. 

Regards,

Jim


----------



## K. Riehl (Mar 12, 2009)

A possible explanation for the end of the Clovis People. Meteor strike.

Clovis People May Have Been Destroyed By "Heavenly Fire"


----------



## Overread (Mar 12, 2009)

I am almost tempted to think that could be more going for controvasy than science. Why would only people be affected by such an event, surely if it was large enough to wipe out a successful human population there would be a multitude of extinctions in other species as well around that time. 

I often wonder if they were just outcompeted by another human group(s) even though the clovis head was well made it is not all the tale and a larger population of different humans (A second migration) would have been a significant challenge/


----------



## Nik (Mar 14, 2009)

Just to add complications, evidence along the WestCoast migration routes will have been drowned by sea-level changes, if not washed away by mega-thrust tsunamis...

Um, IIRC, the proposed event was supposed to have killed off most of the mega-fauna, starving their predators. Lack of crater(s)attributed to erosion, air-burst per Tunguska, and/or impact on ice-cap...


----------

