"Land Bridge" theory?

[Forum Monk]

I think it was progressive, not all at once. I think our ancestors ventured out a little bit more at a time, and "reported back" (continents, islands, currents, wildlife, etc...).

As to the choice of lifestyles, if populations grew to large enough numbers, some may have ventured inland.

I'm not an expert on the topic but from a practical point of view, unless colonization was by accident or exile, a population needs motivation to move. I tend to believe, weather, dwindling food supplies or accomodations, or natural disasters provided the motivation. Granted there are a few brave souls with adventurist spirits, but it seems very difficult to navigate hundreds of miles of open waters and make your way back to tell others. Just my 2 cents worth.

[Digit]

No problem.

[Minimalist]

but it seems very difficult to navigate hundreds of miles of open waters and make your way back to tell others

Yes. And even if you somehow make your way back to the original group conditions there would have had to have deteriorated to the point that the whole gang would be willing to follow you on a wild goose chase. Given the tendency of groups of people to cling to the known rather than embrace the unknown, this seems like the most unlikely possibility for any sort of large scale movement.

[Digit]

I can't see colonisation taking place by accident, discovery, yes. Motivation would seem to be the driving force in all migrations. Pogroms, hunger, warfare, natural disaster, all these seem to be the root cause of migrations, apart from forced colonisation as used by Stalin and the British penal system.
Certainly some people have been motivated by a sense of adventure but they seem to be a minority.

[Minimalist]

I think the point is that they were not aware that there were "colonizing."
Those who came by sea were simply moving along the Ice Age coastline hunting as they went and ended up here.

I don't think there was any conscious attempt to re-settle elsewhere. These weren't the Goths breaking into the Roman Empire because the Huns were coming.

[Digit]

I think that's absolutely true Min, I was thinking of later settlements, Europeans in the US and Australia for example and Mexicans today.

[Forum Monk]

It is possible that a hunting party could venture out, and for some reason find it impossible to return. But unless women went along, it's unlikely such a 'forced' colony could exist for long. Still, it explains how some peoples may have intermingled.

I agree it must have been accidental in the sense that they did not set out to colonize. They were probably following the groceries.

Nevertheless, is it reasonable to assume that North and South America was devoid of human habitation until the ice-age?

[Digit]

Here we have a classical case of does absence of evidence equal evidence of absence? Earlier the subject of fossil dating as evidence of the earliest colonisation of the Americas was raised, I don't think they are the final answer at present. When you think how infrequently fossilization takes place, and how many have survived to date, and how many still await discovery, I think it fair to suggest that we are still on page one of the history book.

[Minimalist]

Nevertheless, is it reasonable to assume that North and South America was devoid of human habitation until the ice-age?

There are those on this board who think they have evidence that it was not devoid. If their original dating holds up, and if Al Goodyear's Topper site holds up, they may well be correct.

[Cognito]

There are those on this board who think they have evidence that it was not devoid. If their original dating holds up, and if Al Goodyear's Topper site holds up, they may well be correct.

Charlie and I do have evidence. However, overthrowing dogma is a long, excruciating and laborious enterprise. Most of the surface lithics in my collection cannot be dated much further back than 20,000bce since, after all, they came from the surface of a Pleistocene lake that quickly drained at that time. Only a well-controlled archaeological dig in the right spot will provide reliable dates. And yes, we plan to look for bones.

Charlie's initial date of c. 143,000kya is now being re-verified by two of the best geologists in the field. If his dates hold up, it should create quite a stir. Dates at Calico have recently, in the past two years, been re-verified at 135,000kya. Get enough of these sites to come out of the closet and we'll be having a Paradigm Shift Parade.

[Charlie Hatchett]

Get enough of these sites to come out of the closet and we'll be having a Paradigm Shift Parade.

Yup. I hear Mike Waters (A&M) and Paul Renne (Berkeley) went back down to
Hueyatlaco in November, to collect more specimens for dating...last dated at 1.1 million B.P.

Then we have 50,000 B.P. minimum dates coming out of Topper (Al Goodyear, USC).

I was under the impression the Calico artifacts were dated, minimally, to 200,000 B.P. by Jim Bischoff (USGS)...and marching further backwards in time.

[stan]

i made a couple of points in my response to the "current" maps that no one addressed:

A vessel doesn't have to "sink" to have a voyage ruined and a few sailors drowned. How about those storms? Canoes can capsize and rafts can break up.

The currents: Look at those arrows and the convergences & divergence). Its pretty "clear" from the maps that a journey across either ocean, if you didn't already have the means of knowing your location/destination and a means to steer, not to mention a specific destination, it would be quite easy to
miss a turn somewhere and end up ...god knows where...maybe back to where you started.

Still, it's not impossible, I grant you.

[Minimalist]

we'll be having a Paradigm Shift Parade

I love a parade.

[Cognito]

I was under the impression the Calico artifacts were dated, minimally, to 200,000 B.P. by Jim Bischoff (USGS)...and marching further backwards in time.

Yes, the initial uranium-thorium dating by Bischoff on the main pit resulted in a date of 200,000 years bp. As I recall, he dated material from directly above an ancient fire pit so it was older than that. However, Fred Budinger did some recent dating in a different pit using the thermoluminescence technique at 17-1/2 feet that came to 135,000 years bp. As I remember, the first date was from a deeper level, but that's just what I recall. I'll ask Fred about the depth differential.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1528086/posts

Budinger is now highly interested in using Beryllium-10 dating which looks quite promising. However, as you know the main pits are currently shut down since the California Bureau of Land Management (BLM) thinks they are unsafe. About $2,000 in shoring will bring them up again. The BLM is running some sort of agenda out there, so screw them (yes, those are California tax dollars at work).

[Minimalist]

those are California tax dollars at work).

Well Governor Groppenator just broke his leg. $2,000 should just about cover the cost of the cast.