Graham Hancock being proven right all along about ancient humans in America.

Graham Hancock has been trying to convince present archeology that humans have been in the Americas for thousands of years longer than the accepted "Clovis" aged settlements of around ~13,000 years ago. His excellent book, "America Before" shows the kind of research he has been doing all of his life, including his previous works "Magicians of the Gods","Fingerprints of the Gods" and his recent Netflix special" Ancient Apocalypse". These works made Graham famous however mainstream science has never acknowledged the contributions he has made in his studies of ancient civilization on this planet, and how far back they really go.

Mainstream archeology has been throwing him under the bus ever since he published his research on early humans in America, but now he is being proven correct, every year that passes.

Additionally, his research with Randall Carlson in past years also proved the vast YD related flooding in the American NorthWest as well as in the Hudson Valley. This was also boo-hoo'ed by mainstream archeology but is now absolutely accepted science as well as other YD effects of a cosmic catastrophe all around the northern hemisphere of Earth.

Scientists say they’ve confirmed evidence that humans arrived in the Americas far earlier than previously thought

So, just last week, mainstream science acknowldedges a recent study of footprints discovered at an ancient lakebed in White Sands National Park date back to around 25,000 years ago.

Recently, Dr. Al Goodyear of the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology at the University of South Carolina directed the research at the Topper Site. The site is on the bank of the Savannah River in Allendale County about 15 miles from the USC Salkehatchie Campus. Evidence was found of human settlement there that is over 50,000 years old, in a layer under the well known Paleo (Clovis) site there.

In 2020, archaeologists digging in
Chiquihuite Cave
in the Astillero Mountains of central Mexico unearthed about 1,900 stone artifacts. Radiocarbon and optically stimulated luminescence dating of the objects suggested that humans might have occupied the area 31,000 to 33,000 years ago.

As time marches on, I am sure that other existing evidence, yet unpublished and archived by Graham (to avoid the vicious attacks on him) will come to light and prove to the world what an extremely smart and dedicated researcher he is.

But will they ever admit he was right?

It has been interesting lately, with all the new finds.

I need to go back and read his books again.

a reply to: charlyv

When you are hated by the mainstream of science, you know you're over the target.

In other words, Native Americans aren't. They aren't Native to the Americas. They aren't "indigenous." They simply got here a few thousand years before the Europeans. The Clovis People were latecomers to the party. That ought to go over well with current politically correct meme.

This is a science problem, very similar to what happened over the Covid outbreak. Established theories are bread & butter in science. In terms of money and ego. The peer review process has more to do with ego and funding than actual forwarding science. Remember all of Hancock's work was denied by the establishment in archeology. Clovis was not accepted initially either.

In his "America Before" he also shows the evidence that so much of early settlement evidence were overlooked and also outright destroyed by farms and city developers alike, especially in the mid U.S. like Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin...

Many were earthen works, like the preserved "Serpent Mound" in Ohio, oddly enough located in an ancient meteorite crater...
This place actually prohibited Him and Randall Carlson from going back there to do more investigation. Incredible.

originally posted by: schuyler
In other words, Native Americans aren't. They aren't Native to the Americas. They aren't "indigenous." They simply got here a few thousand years before the Europeans. The Clovis People were latecomers to the party. That ought to go over well with current politically correct meme.

No, it actually most likely means that the Native American ancestors who came from Asia, maybe have arrived 10,000 years earlier than we thought.

Some of the NA ancestors, such as the Clovis People, have been dated back to about 13,000 years ago on what is now USA. They came here, remained here, and became/evolved into what we call Native Americans today.

It's an astonishing discovery anyway, just looking at how the human race developed, but if it's true it could possibly give the Native Americans a claim 10,000 years older. Clovis people may have come from these earlier travelers.

Pretty cool!

originally posted by: chiefsmom
But will they ever admit he was right?

It has been interesting lately, with all the new finds.

I need to go back and read his books again.

He'll never get his due. Yet his legacy will live on. The new crop he's cultivated with people like Corsetti, VanKerkwyyk, snake bros and of course Rogan.

Like many great people in history, they'll get their due long after they've shed their mortal coils

a reply to: JinMI

It certainly is cool, and I find it one of the most interesting of theories lately. We are slowly finding out how really sophisticated and resourceful our ancestors were and most likely travelled the entire globe on not-so-primitive boats.

a reply to: charlyv

There may have been a landmass in the Pacific.

Continent of Mu?


But that's a bit out there still.

a reply to: charlyv

I have to admit to being a fan since Fingerprints of the gods....Its seriously interesting to see how his theory has evolved into what it is now.

The Aboriginal DNA found and recorded in the Amazon, also speaks to a much more intricate and drawn out history too in the area.

It truly is fascinating.

Ego can't get in the way forever.

a reply to: charlyv

a reply to: charlyv

they've known people crossed the Bering Land Bridge at least 25,000years ago, but denied it because it didn't fit the clovis theory.
there were bones found of many different animals in the blue fish caves in Yukon, Canada that showed evidence of butchering, with cut marks on them.

there is also DNA evidence that suggests the Bering Land Bridge was a two way street. in siberia there was a 24000 year old skeleton of a young boy who's Y chromosomes look more like western eurasians and native americans, and three were found that in the kamchatka peninsula who died 500 years ago, whose DNA show native american heritage.

a reply to: charlyv

Hancock was just paying attention, and then spun a big narrative around it, that's all... the clovis culture wasn't really 'discovered', it was known about for a very long time and offered up a clear timeline and artifact trail leading back to Asia. And it was the most dominant culture in North America, but there's evidence of clovis like culture going down into South America.

There's been dozens of discoveries that pre date the clovis culture, or suggesting clovis people were there much earlier.

This also doesn't mean that humans didn't come from somewhere else to the Americas.

Always thought Graham Hancock was onto something…

Seems like historians today care more about keeping their jobs and status, when they should be challenging the historic narratives they’ve been spoon fed most of their lives.

S+F

- JC

originally posted by: charlyv
So, just last week, mainstream science acknowldedges a recent study of footprints discovered at an ancient lakebed in White Sands National Park date back to around 25,000 years ago.

Though I believe we been here longer than 15,000 years this above is being relooked at and is about 15,000 years old not 25,000

The site is on the bank of the Savannah River in Allendale County about 15 miles from the USC Salkehatchie Campus. Evidence was found of human settlement there that is over 50,000 years old, in a layer under the well known Paleo (Clovis) site there.

How do they suggest 50,000 years? They say they found pre-Clovis that is 15,000 years or older "and maybe 50,000 years" that there is one hell of a jump on a "maybe" lol

in the Astillero Mountains of central Mexico unearthed about 1,900 stone artifacts. Radiocarbon and optically stimulated luminescence dating of the objects suggested that humans might have occupied the area 31,000 to 33,000 years ago.

How do you radiocarbon date stone?

originally posted by: strongfp

This also doesn't mean that humans didn't come from somewhere else to the Americas.

By dates, it really seems like there were 4 different directions humans came.

1. Bering Strait, maybe in small groups earlier like Blue Fish, but larger numbers 14-13,000 years ago.
2. Europe side 16,000+
3. Australia side through the islands 14-15,000 years ago
4. Directly across from Africa to South America maybe 20,000+ years ago.

a reply to: Xtrozero

How do you radiocarbon date stone

you don't, they date the sediment around and on it and guesstimate.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I'd imagine those coming from Africa and Europe (if they did) were in small sporadic pockets.

I'm just wondering, if people did come from Africa they would have taken the west coast, to Caribbean sailing passage, but the oldest settlements in South and Central America are far south.

Europe was probably through glacial hopping.

originally posted by: AnInvisibleCorner
The Aboriginal DNA found and recorded in the Amazon, also speaks to a much more intricate and drawn out history too in the area.

It truly is fascinating.

Ego can't get in the way forever.

a reply to: charlyv

Yes, Amazonian Tribesmen DNA had Micronesian and or Polynesian DNA. I found that bit remarkable. Either they came over the Andes, traveled down from Central America, around the tip of S. America, or all of the above over thousands of years.

The Olmec heads that were uncovered in Bolivia (?) are clearly of Polynesian facial structure, some have posited a negroid appearance, but I stand by Polynesian, with plenty of other historical and genetic support.

There is a rumor propagated by an early 20th century author, Baird Spaulding, that the Tibetans have a legend recorded that advanced civilization was 1st in S. and Central America.

I have never accepted that all human beings had the same origins IE Africa, it doesn’t make sense to me given wide disparities in racial characteristics, DNA and even blood types.

I live an hour north of the Serpent mound and 15 minutes from another huge mound in Greene county Ohio. Many archeologists had the same suspicions as Hancock, but were kept quiet for decades.

I applaud Hancock, have always loved his work.