English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I don't care what answer you give just not evolution because Evolutions has too many missing links and holes in it's theories which even Charles Darwin questioned and doubted many times.

2006-12-22 15:08:39 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Anthropology

26 answers

Then what answer will you believe? According to the best studies, backed up by archeological finds (tools, bones etc). Man travelled over many thousands of years, from Africa, to Asia, then across the land bridge (which is now the Behring strait) to North America, then down to South America. They would have walked, not having tamed any large pack animals yet. Perhaps while following herds of animals and/or keeping ahead of the ice age encroachment.

Since you mention the "holes" in evolutionary theory....
Darwin never pretended to have all the answers, no scientist does, that's part of the beauty of studying science, the discovery of more answers.
The theory of Evolution by natural selection is one of the more robust and elegant of all theories. Every branch of science can be used to support it, from carbon dating analysis, DNA analysis, forensics, medicine, dentistry etc etc. The only way it can be dismissed is by ignoring all the evidence.
The missing links are an expected part of the fossil records dating back millions of years. But they do date back in a logical order. You can discern a fair idea of a jigsaw puzzle, even with a few pieces missing. No one is claiming to have all the answers in science.

This is the only logical, scientific answer. The only other answer would be that they were created where they were, waiting for Europeans to come and slaughter them and take over their lands, exploit their wealth of resources and spread diseases.

It's your choice, but I would go with the first option, it is the most widely accepted theory.

2006-12-22 17:41:12 · answer #1 · answered by Terracinese 3 · 3 2

No matter the theories set down as fact, there is no one alive today that can tell us how they arrived in the lands now called North and South America so very long ago to settle the big new land, which at the time had camels and the claims are for a very prehistoric horse, how about that!

Hey guys, the land bridge for the Northern settlement is still a theory, the same as the cockle boats to get the people of South America there. Anyone have a theory why Kennewick Man shows more Caucasian than what is considered Native American? Or why the artistic symbolism of the extreme Southern part of South America is older than what is in the Northern part of North America, although similar enough to be labeled the same, (in some experts opinions)?

I read an interesting paper not long ago on the types of spear points used and left in the Americas match those found in France and possibly the knowledge to make them came from there...another theory, people. But we do know from their grave goods that the Vikings reached the northeastern coast of North America....just not far back enough to have peopled the Americas.

Aw heck, Santa brought them all and that's another theory!!!

2006-12-23 00:35:36 · answer #2 · answered by cowboy 3 · 0 2

There is no real definitive proof one way or the other on how anyone got to the Americas. Some theories even include sea faring people who followed the tides in primitive boats, much like the ancient Hawaiians.

The most common theory is the land bridge, and the theory is not that it was made of ice, rather the water levels had lowered because of an ice age and exposed slivers of land connection Asia to North America, animals began to migrate across this pass and the humans who used the animals to survive followed.

Oh and to make this more confusing there are theories that people from Africa (Egypt specifically) also ended up in the Americas and brought the ideas of Pyramid building, thanks to Thor Hererdahl's voyages, but even he thought that idea was a little loony.

I have even heard a “glass of water” theory. As the people moved in they moved in, they moved south, as land was taken up the people progressively stayed further and further north, like pouring water in to a glass.

As you can tell it is all theories. I never heard a theory of man evolving in the Americas tough. That’s a new one for me and I was an archeology/anthropology major.

2006-12-24 00:41:03 · answer #3 · answered by Stone K 6 · 1 0

There is also evidence, gathered by comparing the types of arrow and spear points used in Siberia, the Americas, and Europe, that people traveled from Europe along the edge of an ice shelf at the end of the last ice age. People could have sailed boats made of skin stretched over a wooden frame and eaten seal and other sea animals. The topic of migration to the Americas is debated by scholars. The truth is that there were probably various separate migrations. Some evidence suggests that humans have lived in the Americas for longer then is traditionally thought. A great book on Native American civilizations is 1491:New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus by Charles Mann.

2006-12-22 15:53:35 · answer #4 · answered by borg_of_earth 2 · 1 1

Evolution has nothing to do with the migration of humans to the North American continent.

Evolution has taken place over millions of years, the migration of humans from Asia to the America's has only been over the last 12,000+ years. Evolution takes much longer than that. The peoples that still inhabit the far reaches of Peru, the Central and South America are still identical genetically to those that came across the Bering Straight. The only differences are cultural, not genetic.

You really need to study history. All of it, not just the Americas. Your question shows huge holes in common knowledge of humanity, geology and biology. None of which has anything to do with evolution or religion.

2006-12-22 20:26:03 · answer #5 · answered by youngliver2000 3 · 1 1

As a number of people pointed out the evidence suggests that they walked from Asia, There is also fairly good evidence that after arriving in current day Alaska, that they actually boated in different migrations down the Pacific coast as the Ice Age had made inland migration nearly impossible by just walking. As the peoples boated down the Pacific coast, they apparently migrated across the Americas from a general West-to- East path. Some of the Peruvian pottery samples are nearly identical to types found in Japan, but nowhere else in Oceania or coastal US suggesting that migration occurred from different Asian countries at different periods. Whatever the truth is, I am sure that our attempts to recreate it will always have some holes in it, because the task of digging all of the sites would take as long as the migration itself.

2006-12-25 14:49:02 · answer #6 · answered by cuban friend 5 · 0 0

basically they want you to explain what caused the native americans in north america and south america to live so differently from each other. The hint climate is a big factor along with location. the plains indians tended to be nomadic where as ones who lived near a good water supply or the coast created a permanent settlement. do research their religious practices also.

2016-05-22 21:33:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What does the migration of peoples to the Americas have to do with evolution? The land bridge theory is well supported by genetic and archaeological evidence. I do not know why I am telling you this, because this theory has some " holes " in it and it's supporters doubted it at times. So, I guess I will not even mention evolution to you.

2006-12-22 15:33:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Native Americans are not really native to the America’s. They came across the Bearing Straight during the last Ice Age (about 15,000 to 12,000 BC if I remember my Anthropology) from Mongolia. Some stayed in Alaska, some stayed in Western Canada, some moved into what is now the United States and some moved as far south as Northern Mexico. Artifacts and human remains belonging to people of European descent have been found dating back to 12,000BC from the Northeastern US into Washington state.

The Pacific Islanders, not the Mongolian peoples that are considered “Native Americans”, populated South America.

To Hawke: I stand corrected. Of course the pacific Islanders are Asians but since they did travel from a different part of Asia at a different time I thought it was a significant enough difference to note. Usually these peoples are not referred to as Native Americans but its been many years since I was in school and could be mistaken. I always appreciate someone making an intelligent correction to my BS.

2006-12-22 15:20:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

According to current scientific knowledge, human beings did not evolve in North or South America but instead arrived by sea or by a land bridge that formerly connected North America with Asia. Most (if not all) of those indigenous peoples descended from peoples living in Siberia. They entered North America by at least 12,000 years ago and diversified into hundreds of culturally distinct nations and tribes.

2006-12-22 15:16:29 · answer #10 · answered by Sammy Say 2 · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers