Native American bones found in an underwater cave off the coast of Mexico are the earliest carbon dated. They support the theory that morphological differences between such bones and modern Native Americans are the result of 'in place evolution' rather than being the result of multiple migrations to the Americas. Per the article:
Dating close to the time when people first entered the New World, the early American, or Paleoamerican, skeleton features Native American DNA while showing a distinctly different skull shape. The research provides new clues to how the Americas were first populated. It suggests the morphological differences between Paleoamericans, the first people to inhabit the Americas after the most recent ice age, and modern Native Americans are not the result of separate migrations from southeast Asia or even Europe. Rather, they belong to the same population that "evolved in place" in the Americas and Beringia, a now partially submerged landmass including parts of Siberia, Alaska and the Yukon….The skeleton produced the earliest radiocarbon age, confirmed in two separate laboratories, of any on the Americas," Chatters told Discovery News. Indeed the human remains were dated between 12,700 and 12,900 years old.
John, you post interesting science articles in this forum quite often. I just wanted to let you know that I personally appreciate your time and effort in doing so very much. Although many times I lack the scientific knowledge to discuss or argue the details in these stories, I always learn something new and fascinating about the general topic. Thanks for posting! --Carl
I'm glad you like them Flying Atheist.
Here's another article of a similar find in Montana. Sorry if you have already posted something about this: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140212-anzik-skelet...
Very interesting Kent.
Extract: ". . . .Dating close to the time when people first entered the New World, the early American, or Paleoamerican, skeleton features Native American DNA while showing a distinctly different skull shape. The research provides new clues to how the Americas were first populated. . . ."
12000 to 13000 years old means 10,000 to 11,000 BC. This seems too short a time interval for significant differences in "skull shape" to develop. I would be cautious about drawing conclusions on the basis of a single finding of a different skull type.
The same thing occurred to me but, in that the DNA is supposed to be the same, the finding still suggests a single migration or no more than multiple migrations of the same stock of people. An early specimen having DNA inconsistent with that of modern Native Americans might be necessary to make a more general multiple migration theory credible. I don't know whether such a specimen exists. However, to the credit of the article, even today I see differences in the skulls of the descendants of Maya - Inca - Aztec type peoples and North American Native Americans - even though my understanding is that DNA testing says they are all of the same stock.
Really interesting reading! Thanks for posting!