From: thom@crayfish.ucsd.edu (Thom Cleland)
Newsgroups: alt.native
Subject: Re: Question of Nativity
Date: 11 Jan 1993 02:14:52 GMT
Organization: Tenuous at best
NNTP-Posting-Host: crayfish.ucsd.edu

In article <9301072200.AA09962@anchor.esd.sgi.com> anchor.esd.sgi.com!lyn (Lyn Dearborn) writes:
>
>As for the land bridge theory, Floyd Westerman, about 15 years ago, at a
>CIEA conference said he was getting really sick of these "self educated"
>anthros and elementary school teachers get beyond the "theories" and deal
>with evidence to the contrary.....  or as Floyd put it "who's to say which
>ways those mocassin tracks went?  In 1986, while in a tiny hospital in Norway
>getting some Norwegian granite removed from my knee, the doctor was noticing
>a "basketry medallion" necklace I was wearing and enquired about it.  When I
>told him what is was, and why I wear it, he asked if I was going to attend
>the "conference" in Iceland that a "bunch of international anthropoligists"
>were holding ... that's all the info he had.  Then the following day, I was
>at the National Museum at Bigdoy (spelling?) outside Oslo, and the Curator
>of the Textile collection asked if I was going to "the Conference" in Iceland..
>Later that day when I enquired about this "conference" that I clearly should
>know something about, I was told that anthropologists/archaelogists from all
>over the world were meeting in Iceland to discuss "recent" evidence found that
>led them to believe that the things that have been "found" on the other side
>of the Bering Straits which clearly came from North America, are dated as being
>older than evidence found here that has come from the other side ..... I hope
>I'm not confusing anyone needlessly.  Bottom line:  "Stuff" from the US found
>across the sea is older than the "Stuff" from Siberia/Mongolia or whatever
>you want to call it, that we have found here.  This would tend to support
>the other theory, which states that the Indians HERE travelled across the
>land bridge to the Mongolian side....  I believe the basis for the "accepted
>theory" .... we came from Asia ... is because there wasn't evidence of
>large animal life here to support a stone age culture, or whatever .... but
>the mounds found since 1970 show otherwise ....  I'm not even going to pretend
>to be a qualified anthro or archaeologist, and the information given to me
>regarding this meeting in Iceland was very convincing ... unfortunately, I
>didn't have the financial resources to follow through myself.
>
Now this is interesting!  Do you  (Lyn)  have any names of the researchers
involved in this conference or related work?  (or does anybody?).  Our
commonalities as a species  (indeed, as mammals)  make it obvious that
all peoples share a common ancestry somewhere; the current consensus is
Africa  (largely due to the plethora of australopithecine and Homo 
fossils)  but I'd be very interested in evidence that the Americas are
the original continent.  Have any pre-sapiens hominid fossils been 
found on this continent?  Of course, also, during the centuries ofthe
ice ages there may well have been many, many migrations back and forth;
I think the idea of a single great Migration is kind of simplistic.


Thom


-- 
Thom Cleland     \ /^^/  >Neural systems/network physiology< >Amigaphile<  
(619) 453-7516    \OO/  >Aoinagi Shito-ryu == bend, and the wind passes <
tcleland@ucsd.edu  ++  >B3 f cdv g++ k+(+) m s+ r+ p growl+ purr++ zzz- <
"Wild magic is graven in every rock, every tree, in every blade of grass" 
Newsgroups: alt.native