Who Were the Original Inhabitants of North America?
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on September 8th, 2014
Todd Neiss, Bigfooter, Bigfoot witness and Beachfoot organizer, offered the following brief essay:
Who were the original inhabitants of North America?
When the “Kennewick Man” was found on the banks of the Columbia River in 1996, local Native Americans were livid that scientists had carbon-dated him to be nearly 10,000 years old; pre-dating modern Native American tribes. In addition, DNA tests proved that he belonged to the Ainu people (Japan-Russia region). This incensed them as 1) it undermined their claim to be the original race in America and 2) supposes that modern Native Americans may well have decimated the Ainu when they migrated there. In fact, a spear point was found lodged in the hip of Kennewick Man. They fought hard in court to prevent DNA analysis; claiming that he belonged to their ancestors. They lost.
Furthermore, the oldest human DNA discovered in North America was found in Central Oregon at the “Paisley Caves Complex.” Coprolites there were analyzed and determined to be as old as 14,290 years old. A hearth (fire pit) was discovered nearly seven feet below the current strata; where the bones of waterfowl, fish, and large mammals including extinct camel and horse.” This would make the inhabitants pre-Clovis! Again, the genetic ties were of Asian-Siberian decent.
Interestingly, the Proceedings of the National Association of Sciences (PNAS) indicates primate migration from Asia to North America began via Beringia (Bering Land Bridge) as early as the early Eocene Epoch (56-47 million years ago). These early primates were small marmoset-like primates were known as teilhardina asiatica.
In the John Day Fossil Beds in Central Oregon, fossils of another primate, Ekgmowechashala philotau, have been discovered. They date back to the Miocene Epoch; as recently as 5 million years ago. It was during the Miocene Epoch that apes first arose and diversified. Great apes are believes to have come into existence between 8 to 4 million years ago. So there is conclusive evidence that primates once roamed the Pacific Northwest. In fact, the oldest known primate-like mammal species, Plesiadapis, actually originated in North America. Was Bigfoot far behind?
In my estimation, such a trans-Beringian migration dovetails nicely with the theory of Gigantopithicus immigration via the same route as humans; albeit much earlier.
See also: Army National Guard Officer’s Sasquatch Encounter
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005.
I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films:
OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.
There are two ways something like sasquatch could have happened: migrating here (really, simply expanding its range; the “migrations” over the land bridge actually weren’t, so much) …
…or evolving here.
Given the presence of fossil primates in NA (and the estimate that we don’t have remains for 95% of the primates that have existed), the second cannot at all be ruled out.
Given we really do not know how the primates of South American and Madagascar arrived at their locations, presumably from Africa, the belief that we should know how Sasquatch, if they exist, arrived in North America seems somewhat unnecessary.
While the fossil record has some wonderful specimens, it is not a complete record of all life on this planet and likely holds a fractional account of it.
Chimpanzee fossils weren’t described until 2005, a little over 190 years after it was described as a species.
While there are fossils of several giraffe species, I don’t think there are any for the modern giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) and the candidates for the ancestors are G. jumae or G. gracilis.
The oldest member of the giant panda clade, Kretzoiarctos was found in Spain during 2012. I believe all other discovered giant panda fossils have been in China.
Insanity: precisely.
To add only one: the lesser panda’s first known fossil antecedent was found in Tennessee.
(To show the unlikely locations all kinds of things – including science information – can be found, check here. And pay more attention to the sides of those colorful U-Haul trucks.)
To those who say “that’s not proof,” that doesn’t matter. Scientists don’t follow proof (as U-Haul can teach you if you are so inclined).
They follow evidence.
There is Mescalerolemur horneri, discovered in the Devil’s Graveyard in Texas during 2011. Phylogenetic analyses revealed that it is more closely related to Eurasian and African adapiforms than to the North American notharctines. (Kirk, E. Christopher & Williams, Blythe A. “New adapiform primate of Old World affinities from the Devil’s Graveyard Formation of Texas.” Journal of Human Evolution 61(2011) 156-168.
Additionally there is Mahgarita stevensi discovered in 1976, which is likely an immigrant from Asia (The Primate Fossil Record, Cambridge University Press, 2004).
Both are dated to the Eocene about 42 to 38 million years ago and do provide evidence of faunal interchange between North America and East Asia during the middle Eocene.
DWA: I agree. And thanks for the link!
The problem is less that we don’t know, that we don’t know that we don’t know.
Sorry to go all Don Rumsfeld on everybody. 🙂
Hi Todd,
Great to see you posting but I’m afraid you’re in a minority here. It’s still possible that Sasquatch has a Giganto origin but as time goes on it becomes more remote. We really don’t have a solid educated clue yet about what the species may be that’s provable and reproducible. However, we now have the technology to either capture or kill a specimen and that should happen within the next decade. I think when we do get a specimen we’re all in for a big surprise as to what it is. My best,
Yet another example of politics and science orthodoxy getting in the way of real science. Students in the 60s and 70s researching their theses in paleontology and anthropology report that they discovered evidence (tools, bones etc.) that contradicted the land bridge origin theory. Their advisors instructed them to basically discard that evidence. One can only hope that a new generation of students will scour the university’s slag drawers.
Professors in the soft sciences seem more concerned today about guarding their own papers rather than finding the truth. Can anyone imagine if the same were true in Computer/Information Science? We’d all still be banging on the keys of Commodores!
mandors: it might actually be worse than you think.
As I frequently put it: if people behaved half the time the way most scientists behave on the not-proven-yet, we wouldn’t have developed science. We wouldn’t have gotten into caves, much less out of them.
Todd,
If you could, please cite the PNAS article(s) you refer to, I would be interested in reading them.
How true Mandor but that’s the struggle of science in trying to understand not only the world around us but the universe as well. I wonder if the species is as intelligent as some suspect and what they must think of our technological achievements? Then again they may not be that intelligent but smart enough to stay away from us while living at the edge of our civilization. My best,