23,000 Year Old Human Footprints found in White Sands New Mexico

Point:
1. completely untrue.
2. completely untrue - the only word you leftists know when it comes to science is “debunked.” You’re idiots
3. research “Younger dryas.” We were here. The climate rapidly changed due to an asteroid impact near what is no Chicago where the ice was a mile thick. It literally wiped us out at the time. And the 1840s expansion was MANIFEST DESTINY - that was white people taking back land which was always ours.

Learn some shit before you open your worthless pie hole, idiot.

Read the article I posted ignoramus. 1-3 are completely true. You were not here. You invaded from Europe in 1494. Before that there were no European caucasians. 1840 was when Caucasians began importing millions of Europeans "give me your poor huddled masses", and that's when the vast majority of you came over here. You guys are trying to play catch up now that I've exposed that the indigenous people were N.egroes, but its a consistent historical fact that there were no Europeans here before your invasion.

White western europeans were the first humans on this continent.

You have to remember that when they first got here it was an ice age and the atlantic ocean was much smaller - much of it was ice and walking across it was absolutely possible.

The Clovis people brought over cave man technology that was so useful it’s been found all over what is now the eastern USA.

THE REASON IT’S CALLED “CLOVIS” is because CLOVIS NEW MEXICO is the farthest west geographical location it was ever found.

That completely debunks the bullshit of it coming from Siberia.

WAKE THE FUCK UP!

CLOVIS CAME FROM THE EAST!

Clovis came from the east, not the west. That’s why it’s called CLOVIS, dumbshit!

Caucasians are a race of pathological liars. Confronted with the reality that their "slave myth" is exposed, they have sought to rewrite history once again to claim to be "native" to the Americas. This trick won't work, the European arrival to the Americas is too recent in history to be so easily whitewashed away. The fliers that brought millions of Europeans to the Americas are still available to see online!

Hey dog raping dumbass, the "solutrean hypothesis" has been thoroughly debunked! Scientists KNOW that Europeans were not here during that period. They recognize your theory as bad pop science, that's it dumbass, so SHUT THE FUCK UP!

Those of us with White Western European ancestry ARE THE TRUE INDIGENOUS.

WE ARE THE NATIVE-BORN NORTH AMERICANS.

The rest of you perpetuate bullshit because you think it gives you standing to spew your political bullshit.

IT DOES NOT!

AMER'ICAN, noun A native of America; originally applied to the aboriginals, or copper-colored races, found here by the Europeans; but now applied to the descendants of Europeans born in America.

Those of us with White Western European ancestry ARE THE TRUE INDIGENOUS.

WE ARE THE NATIVE-BORN NORTH AMERICANS.

The rest of you perpetuate bullshit because you think it gives you standing to spew your political bullshit.

IT DOES NOT!

AMER'ICAN, noun A native of America; originally applied to the aboriginals, or copper-colored races, found here by the Europeans; but now applied to the descendants of Europeans born in America.

Take note of how this piece of shit doesn’t address the facts.

Why is CLOVIS called CLOVIS, DUMBASS?

NO NEED TO ANSWER - I ALREADY EXPLAINED IT AND THUS DEBUNKED YOUR BULLSHIT.

Again, changing the subject.

Why is Clovis called “CLOVIS?”

You Lose!

You’re debunked.

Carbon dating is not accurate.

Who cares why motherfucker?? The point is that the idea that there were Caucasian Europeans here back then is FALSE!

Except scientific facts stand, regardless of how unhappy they make you.

You lose!

Moreover, you know it because you keep changing the subject without answering one simple question.

WHY IS CLOVIS CALLED CLOVIS?

It’s simple. Answer it, loser!

Dunning-Kruger opinion. The decay rate of isotopes is known and the test always gives a range-in this case 2000 year range, so it's not perfect, but it's better than your best guess.
The mega fauna and the people North or New Mexico and TX were cleared out by whatever happened 12,000 years ago, (asteroids or solar excursion) so we only find people in Southern desert these regions. Up North in Alaska and Canada there are settlements back to 24k years ago, S. Carolina 14k, so this is Not news except for the rigidly orthodox, most conservative scientists.

Those of us with White Western European ancestry ARE THE TRUE INDIGENOUS.

WE ARE THE NATIVE-BORN NORTH AMERICANS.

The rest of you perpetuate bullshit because you think it gives you standing to spew your political bullshit.

IT DOES NOT!

AMER'ICAN, noun A native of America; originally applied to the aboriginals, or copper-colored races, found here by the Europeans; but now applied to the descendants of Europeans born in America.

Caucasians are a race of pathological liars. Confronted with the reality that their "slave myth" is exposed, they have sought to rewrite history once again to claim to be "native" to the Americas. This trick won't work, the European arrival to the Americas is too recent in history to be so easily whitewashed away. The fliers that brought millions of Europeans to the Americas are still available to see online!

Who cares why motherfucker?? The point is that the idea that there were Caucasian Europeans here back then is FALSE!

if you can read maybe you can start by reading a bit of wiki then

Known as "Clovis First", the predominant hypothesis among archaeologists in the latter half of the 20th century had been that the people associated with the Clovis culture were the first inhabitants of the Americas. The primary support for this was that no solid evidence of pre-Clovis human habitation had been found. According to the standard accepted theory, the Clovis people crossed the Beringia land bridge over the Bering Strait from Siberia to Alaska during the period of lowered sea levels during the ice age, then made their way southward through an ice-free corridor east of the Rocky Mountains in present-day Western Canada as the glaciers retreated.

Archaeologists have taken a hard, long look at this idea and dismissed it on the basis of insufficient evidence. The mismatch between the archaeological record and the Solutrean hypothesis is so extensive that I can’t cover every problem, but here is a sample:

1. There’s a serious time gap between when the Solutreans could have crossed the Atlantic via the ice bridge (~20,000 YBP) and when Clovis tools begin to show up in the archaeological record (~13,000 YBP). This means that they would have made the points in exactly the same way for 7,000 years. Nowhere else in the Americas do we see technologies and cultures existing unchanging for that length of time.

2. There is no evidence of boat use, or tools used for making boats at Solutrean sites. Although the Ice Bridge documentary makes much of an image of a fish and an auk in a French cave, it is a bit of a stretch (to say the least!) to claim that this is sufficient to demonstrate a sophisticated seafaring culture, capable of crossing the Atlantic. The existence of a year-round “ice bridge” across the Atlantic during the Last Glacial Maximum is not supported by paleoclimate data. Instead, sea ice in the Atlantic would most likely have been seasonal, with a connection between North American and Europe only a few months out of the year.

3. The notion of overshot flaking technique as evidence of a link between Clovis and Solutrean has been challenged by many archaeologists, who think it far more plausible that the two cultures arrived at the same technology independently. As Strauss (2000) puts it, “One or two technical attributes are insufficient to establish a cultural link or long-distance interconnection.”

4. Radiocarbon dates of Clovis sites do not show a pattern one would expect if people diffused into North America from the east coast, as postulated by Stanford and Bradley.

Geneticists, too, have tested the Solutrean hypothesis. If it were true, we would expect to see ancestry from non-Siberian descended populations present in the genomes of ancient Native Americans. We don’t. All contemporary and ancient Native Americans, including the only known ancient individual buried in association with Clovis tools, show descent from an ancestral population with Siberian roots. There is a very clear pattern of evolutionary history recorded in ancient genomes from Siberia, Beringia, and North America, and no evidence for trans-Atlantic gene flow.

This is where the Ice Bridge documentary runs into great problems. It ignores all genomic evidence and instead relies upon an old idea that a particular mitochondrial haplogroup (a group of closely related maternal lineages) known as X shows a connection between North America and Europe. In the documentary, pediatrician/popular science writer Stephen Oppenheimer asserts that the presence of haplogroup X in an ancient North American population is a priori evidence for a European connection.

The documentary makes this case persuasively with graphics and maps showing the presence of this haplogroup in both Europe and North America. But look below the surface and the entire argument falls apart. First of all, Standford, Bradley, and Oppenheimer simply assume that Solutreans would have had X because it’s seen in contemporary European populations.

But in fact, the contemporary European gene pool was formed only within the last 8,000 years, and it’s unknown whether earlier peoples would have had haplogroup X in the same frequencies (or at all). No genomes from Solutren peoples have ever been sequenced, and you should always be cautious when a case is made for extending present day patterns of genetic variation into the past without direct confirmation from ancient DNA.

Today, lineages of haplogroup X are found widely dispersed throughout Europe, Asia, North Africa, and North America. We can reconstruct their evolutionary relationships – much like you can reconstruct a family tree – by looking at patterns of shared and derived mutations. Lineages found in the Americas, X2a and X2g, are not descended from the lineages (X2b, X2d, and X2c) found in Europe. Instead, they share a very ancient common ancestor from Eurasia, X2. (Here is a detailed discussion of the evolution of these haplogroups for anyone interested).

X2a is of a comparable age to other indigenous American haplogroups (A,B,C,D), which would not be true if it was derived from a separate migration from Europe. Finally, the oldest lineage of X2a found in the Americas was recovered from the Ancient One (also known as Kennewick Man), an ancient individual dating to ~9,000 years ago and from the West Coast (not the East Coast as would be predicted from the Solutrean hypothesis). His entire genome has been sequenced and shows that he has no ancestry from European sources. There is no conceivable scenario under which Kennewick Man could have inherited just his mitochondrial genome from Solutreans but the rest of his genome from Beringians. Thus, without additional evidence, there is nothing to justify the assumption that X2a must have evolved in Europe.

The Ice Bridge unfortunately relied on cherry-picking of data to support the ideas of Bradley and Stanford, and it’s not up to the standards of The Nature of Things. When I write about this issue, I frequently hear an argument along the lines of “Well, it could have happened, so maybe it did”. But science isn’t built on “could haves” and “maybes”. You must build your models based on evidence you have, not evidence you wish you had, and the Solutrean hypothesis is lacking sufficient evidence to be considered seriously.