Asian Migration versus CLOVIS?

Looking at the various phenotypes of native Americans, it appears to me that perhaps the first wave possessed a more Asian phenotype, as opposed to a successive wave, which did not proceed beyond the central region of the current USA, which appear to me have a more Caucasian phenotype.

There are also the distinct development of different cultures, such as the Cliff dwelling Pueblo people of the Southern USA and Mexico, while the "Indians" of the Great Plains were more nomadic, their homes being easily transportable.

The discovery of the Clovis Culture was a great step forward in American anthropology. But does it change the idea of the first Americans migrating across the land bridge from Siberia?

Clovis is definitely out, cos DNA research seems to indicate, that the genetic split was even before 20 or 25,000 years. So we have Amerindians in America since maybe 25,000 years, followed by younger waves around 9000 BP, the NaDene and then the Inuits.

Originally posted by toyomotor Originally posted by beorna Clovis is definitely out, cos DNA research seems to indicate, that the genetic split was even before 20 or 25,000 years. So we have Amerindians in America since maybe 25,000 years, followed by younger waves around 9000 BP, the NaDene and then the Inuits. Is CLOVIS really "out", or merely displaced to a date later than the Solutrean hypothesis?

The problem with a connection between solutreen and clovis, is the time gap of about 10,000 years.
The only evidence for such a theory could be the appearence of R1 in North america, especially in the east. But as far as I know, is it till now not sure, whether this is an old group or based on the introduction of european settlers after 1492.

Originally posted by toyomotor Originally posted by beorna Originally posted by toyomotor Originally posted by beorna Clovis is definitely out, cos DNA research seems to indicate, that the genetic split was even before 20 or 25,000 years. So we have Amerindians in America since maybe 25,000 years, followed by younger waves around 9000 BP, the NaDene and then the Inuits. Is CLOVIS really "out", or merely displaced to a date later than the Solutrean hypothesis? The problem with a connection between solutreen and clovis, is the time gap of about 10,000 years. The only evidence for such a theory could be the appearence of R1 in North america, especially in the east. But as far as I know, is it till now not sure, whether this is an old group or based on the introduction of european settlers after 1492. Is there any evidence of "precisely" where Native American people originated?   Is there any credible theory as to the phenotypical differences?

Nobody can have the precisive knowledge about the origins. Native are in great majority Q. Other haplotypes may have exist in america but are extinct or till now not found in samples. The appearence of Q indicates an asian origin and an age younger than 22ky BP.
That the natives look different may be a result of a beginning mongolisation, so that the oldest and maybe most southern populations are less mongolide than the northern or that the mongolide type was brought by populations which came after 9ky BP

All recent native americans have a mongolide phenotype, some more, some less. All fossils who are younger than 8000 years are mongilde too. All fossils which are older are not mingolide. so mongolides seem to be the last wave of migrants