the title says it all but i don't mean after vikings etc i mean the civilizations of inca and maya,how did they get there?

Think some people came from the north west like alaska and others came from the south pacific.

First general theory is that there was a land bridge between Russia and Alaska during an ice age, and people simply walked across while following herds of mammoths and such.

Another theory is that people arrived on boats from Polynesia.

& another theory is that they crossed the Bering Strait by boat.

Humans were definitley in North America by about 14,000 years ago. There is archaeological evidence as old as 40,000 years old, but it's disputed.

Then there's the old aliens-did-it theory.:scan:

LOLANDBRIDGE.

Archaeologists and anthropoligists speculate that the Bering Strait (Between Alaska and Russia) was once iced over, during the Ice Age, and that people migrated over to America, following the mammoths.

Also, there are other Native Americans besides the Incas and the Mayas.

Edit: But recent evidence has shown that people actually went FROM America TO Asia.

Edit: But recent evidence has shown that people actually went FROM America TO Asia.

what where

Then there's the old aliens-did-it theory.:scan:

that remind's me of stargate movie where jackson says all civilizations where connected.

Also curious is how man reached ausrialia 40,000 years ago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mungo_Man)

I think if you subscribe to the Out of Africa hypothesis, a more interesting question is WHY some humans travelled as far as the Americas and Australia?

That's what I find interesting. What there wasn't enough land on the Afro-Eurasian landmass?

I think if you subscribe to the Out of Africa hypothesis, a more interesting question is WHY some humans travelled as far as the Americas and Australia?

That's what I find interesting. What there wasn't enough land on the Afro-Eurasian landmass?

I heard somewhere a theory that Humans followed a costal path, because early man spent alot of time in the water (one reason why we are short of hair compared to other primates, for example)

I think the theory of the "aquatic ape" is not exactly generally accepted!

Human beings are large predators and foragers who live in packs. You need quite a lot of space to support one such pack, because of how much they eat. Naturally they would tend to spread out quite quickly as soon as the populations began to grow. This is why there were several exoduses out of Africa: first Homo erectus, for example, which emerged from Africa and spread over Eurasia; and then later Homo sapiens, which did exactly the same thing.

Edit: But recent evidence has shown that people actually went FROM America TO Asia.
That might be, but that is not evidence that they didn't come from Asia originally. Rather like if modern Americans went back to the country their ancestors emigrated from, yes?

Also curious is how man reached ausrialia 40,000 years ago

By boat or raft, presumably. Or maybe they were really good swimmers.

What about all those other theories about the caucasians in South America over 4000 years ago? All that stuff about how Quetzlcoatl was clearly described as being a white guy? Or those caucasian looking skeletons they found a few years back? Or those megalith statues that look just like Africans?

That's the sort of stuff we want to hear about. Not boring "they went for a stroll over a land bridge". I want to hear about advanced lost civilisations! :borg:

.

Edit: But recent evidence has shown that people actually went FROM America TO Asia.

where proof of this statement
the famous quote goes "that is not evidance its a website"

Also curious is how man reached ausrialia 40,000 years ago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mungo_Man)

carefully?

Also curious is how man reached ausrialia 40,000 years ago

Because some cute girl in a bikini asked him "where the bl**dy hell are you?"

By boat or raft, presumably.

Island-hopping in small boats etc. The lower sea level during the Ice Age can only have made it easier.

my question is who are the real first americans?? i have to admit i dont think its the current native american population... im nearly sure that thear was migration be thears.

What I mean, is look how early they got there.... ! Personally I think they got lost while on a package tour...

my question is who are the real first americans?? i have to admit i dont think its the current native american population... im nearly sure that thear was migration be thears.

No one was the original Americans, because there weren't any. Just like there weren't any original anything (country) unless you are african where humans got their start. I saw on a documentary once (can't remember which) that they checked DNA of American Indians and it was extremely close to Northern Siberians. Apparently the first humans crossed the Bering straight when it was a land bridge about 12,000 years ago.

They've done dna test on alot of different native people's of the america and in some part's there have even been traces of african decent.(Like the Pericu of Baja California)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Siberian_American_Aborigines
Some people even go as far as saying the olmec's were of african decent(dont really belive this) but i know there is alot of proof about migration's by sea from the south pacific.

They've done dna test on alot of different native people's of the america and in some part's there have even been traces of african decent.(Like the Pericu of Baja California)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Siberian_American_Aborigines
Some people even go as far as saying the olmec's were of african decent(dont really belive this) but i know there is alot of proof about migration's by sea from the south pacific.

So there you have it, Americans were ALREADY multi-national and multi-racial even 10,000 years ago :lol:

Well, those big Olmec heads do look very African to me. Explain that one!

Anyone here heard about the 4 passage theory? :(

Perhaps the land could have been dry enough in some areas for people to cross over by lkand, due to the Ice age taking up a lot of the water. That could be one theory on how people could have crossed.

The Egyptians certainly didn't get there via a landbridge though. How do we explain the pyramids, the African heads, and the caucasian gods then?

The Egyptians certainly didn't get there via a landbridge though. How do we explain the pyramids, the African heads, and the caucasian gods then?

That's covered in the 4 passage theory. :)

That's covered in the 4 passage theory. :)

tell us this 4 passage thoery

tell us this 4 passage thoery

OK.

Tomorrow (too late today). :p

OK.

Tomorrow (too late today). :p

Well it's tomorrow today Mirc, where did ya go? ;)

The Egyptians certainly didn't get there via a landbridge though. How do we explain the pyramids, the African heads, and the caucasian gods then?
Pyramids- A triangular building? Its not that hard of a concept to develop indigenously
African Heads-Entirely subjective, they don't look african to me.
Caucasian Gods-Quetzelquoatl was also supposed to be a serpent covered in multi-colored feathers that could fly. Your theory doesn't cover flying feather serpents, so why should ours covered a white man. Also note it was a four legged white man.

I don't know the answers. I'm just asking some questions. I'm a bit disappointed that I can't find any real answers to important historical questions on an internet computer game forum. What's the world coming to?

To answer the OP: They walked. Sea levels were low because of the ice age and America and Asia were joined.

There is also the Solutrean hypothesis which suggests that ice age hunters from the Iberian peninsula followed the sea ice/ocean boundry to eastern North America. This is a new theory that is under debate, it may be that there were several different migrations from and to different locations.

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11451616/
www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2002/columbus.shtml

There was some ice brigde or something like that...

They came from Atlantis.

They came from Atlantis.

Atlantis is America... Grrrrr......


;)

Pyramids- A triangular building? Its not that hard of a concept to develop indigenously
African Heads-Entirely subjective, they don't look african to me.
Caucasian Gods-Quetzelquoatl was also supposed to be a serpent covered in multi-colored feathers that could fly. Your theory doesn't cover flying feather serpents, so why should ours covered a white man. Also note it was a four legged white man.

A white man on a horse with a plumed hat? :-D.

(Not that I really disagree with you, mind). What we really need to keep in mind when dealing with most of those Quetzalcoatl legends is that most of what we know of them was relayed to us via and recorded by the Spaniards, after the conquest.

IE, after the Aztec empire had been brought low by "four-legged feathered white men".

Actually the legend of quetzacoatl is older then the aztecs and spaniards themselves.

A white man on a horse with a plumed hat? :-D
Well I understood it, Quetzelquatl was supposed to arrive as a white man with four legs, physically attached to his body. But being as the Aztecs never saw a horse before, never mind a man riding a horse, it was deemed "good enough" for the prophecy.

And what's to say the Aztecs didn't retroactively change parts of the legend some generations after conquest?

It's probably far easier (if you believe in prophecies) to believe that your ancestors were undone by mistakenly believing a prophecy they believed in had been fulfilled than because they simply weren't up to facing the backstabbing, dirty-playing White Man.

Actually the legend of quetzacoatl is older then the aztecs and spaniards themselves.

Exactly. It's carved into the rocks and can be found all over South America. Queztcoatl has about 6 different names but exactly the same description.

Wasn't Queztcoatl the god of thunder/lightning? I always thought that he was white to represent the colour of a lightning bolt.

OT: The prevailing, accepted theory is that they walked across the Bering Strait from Far Eastern Russia to Alaska during an ice-age. A land-bridge had been formed by lowered sea-levels caused by an ice-age.

I don't buy that Bering land bridge thing. I have heard that it was a bit of a wasteland up there.

I reckon they just came on boats from Asia.

the title says it all but i don't mean after vikings etc i mean the civilizations of inca and maya,how did they get there?
Hmm, I read about how America was founded by the Chinese and they inbreded wit the Indians...
But dat isnt the topic here, Anyways, I remember hearin about a land bridge from Russia-Alaska that is now underwater, that the people used to cross the lil water from Russia to Alaska, and then the people simply followed wherever the food went, which was south :P

I don't buy that Bering land bridge thing. I have heard that it was a bit of a wasteland up there.

I reckon they just came on boats from Asia.There's no way they would've had boats that long ago.

We're talking about 30,000 years ago. To put that into perspective, the bronze age started about 3500 years ago. They can't chop trees with their fingernails.

I bet First-Class tickets were cheaper in 10,000 BCE.

I bet First-Class tickets were cheaper in 10,000 BCE.

I bet u cant find a good Landing Strip Anywhere during 10,000 BCE :P

We're talking about 30,000 years ago. To put that into perspective, the bronze age started about 3500 years ago. They can't chop trees with their fingernails.

Small boats (sufficient to cross short stretches of water between nearby islands, etc) are stone-age technology.

Small boats (sufficient to cross short stretches of water between nearby islands, etc) are stone-age technology.

No they aren't.

Well, you could always ask a Mormon (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=172266&highlight=eran%27s+all+new+mormonism+thread)

No they aren't.
Then how was Australia colonized in 46,000 B.C.?

Then how was Australia colonized in 46,000 B.C.?They walked.

Actually seems I was wrong. Wikipedia says they must've had some sort of ocean vessel by then. Still, I'm not too sure about that personally.

They walked.

Actually seems I was wrong. Wikipedia says they must've had some sort of ocean vessel by then. Still, I'm not too sure about that personally.
Right, people crossed over to the Americas by land, but simple rafts were available. If Tom hanks can make one without modern neccesities, I'm sure our ancestors could.

I have heard that there is plenty of evidence that ocean going rafts were around LONG before 3,500 BC. I can't prove that because I'm not an eminent archaeologist, but I have read some stuff about it. I have heard that there are pictures of balsa wood rafts on the walls of old caves in South America and Thor Heyardahl showed that you could navigate for miles on one of them. And given that most of the ancient South American architecture demonstrates a very advanced understanding of astronomy (the Civ IV tech path is all screwed up) it is not that difficult to envisage the ability to navigate on the ocean back then.

You are talking about an awful long time period when this could have happened. Plenty of time for lots of trial and error.

I have heard that there is plenty of evidence that ocean going rafts were around LONG before 3,500 BC. I can't prove that because I'm not an eminent archaeologist, but I have read some stuff about it. I have heard that there are pictures of balsa wood rafts on the walls of old caves in South America and Thor Heyardahl showed that you could navigate for miles on one of them. And given that most of the ancient South American architecture demonstrates a very advanced understanding of astronomy (the Civ IV tech path is all screwed up) it is not that difficult to envisage the ability to navigate on the ocean back then.
I wasn't even considering navigation. But I would assume there had to be someone willing to build a simple craft if he can see the other shore--which is often the case in Indonesia, the Mediteranian, etc.

No they aren't.

With all due respect: You're talking complete bull. There's concrete archaeological evidence of simple boats and canoes at least ten thousand years old, and good reason to believe they've been around much longer than that.

We know that sea kyaks made out of animal skins and bone are stone age technology because they were used by the stone age people living in the Arctic 200 years ago. I think it is entirely logical to assume that it is possible people could have made such craft 20,000 years ago, they had similar levels of development. As I said in my previous post about the Salutrian hypothesis there is increasing evedince that at least some of the settlers came from the Atlantic side, probably traveling in small boats following prey along the edge of the sea ice. The sea ice/ocean boundry is an exremely fertile ecosystem with a lot of small game and fish (otters, seals, sea lions, salmon, halibut, small whales). It is a plausible hypothesis.

I think it's definitely plausible. It is implausible to think that humans suddenly became geniuses at everything in some sort of flash of brilliance 5,000 years ago and were complete no-hopers for the 50,000 years before that.

Right, people crossed over to the Americas by land, but simple rafts were available. If Tom hanks can make one without modern neccesities, I'm sure our ancestors could.Drifting on a raft across Indonesian islands to reach Australia is very easy when compared to drifting across an ocean.

Personally I find it staggering how humans made it to Australia. Not many people can fit on a raft and you can't direct where to go.

Drifting on a raft across Indonesian islands to reach Australia is very easy when compared to drifting across an ocean.

Personally I find it staggering how humans made it to Australia. Not many people can fit on a raft and you can't direct where to go.
lol, ur so rite, but since alot of Austrialians are white, does dat mean their ancestors might be European? (Europeans floating on raft to Austrailia, almost impossible :/)

lol, ur so rite, but since alot of Austrialians are white, does dat mean their ancestors might be European? (Europeans floating on raft to Austrailia, almost impossible :/)

Australians are white because Australia was a British penal colony, established in the late eighteenth century. Their ancestors are most certainly European, they are from England. :mischief:

lol, ur so rite, but since alot of Austrialians are white, does dat mean their ancestors might be European? (Europeans floating on raft to Austrailia, almost impossible :/)
Its almost so incredible to think about but a completely different race of "white" people developed there over the past 40,000 years. And by an almost complete inconcievable coincidense the "Aussies" developed a language that is 98% similar to English. The so called "James Cook" theory, mentioned above, is compleet nosense.

lol, ur so rite, but since alot of Austrialians are white, does dat mean their ancestors might be European? (Europeans floating on raft to Austrailia, almost impossible :/)
Its almost so incredible to think about but a completely different race of "white" people developed there over the past 40,000 years. And by an almost complete inconcievable coincidense the "Aussies" developed a language that is 98% similar to English. The so called "James Cook" theory, mentioned above, is compleet nosense.
Not only that, developed largely entirely distinctly from the Australoid people living side by side with them.

Not only that, developed largely entirely distinctly from the Australoid people living side by side with them.

Incorrect. Those were black colonizers and invaders from East Africa. Fortunately the native "aussies" drove them off and hence why there are very few left in Australia.

It's like those so-called mongoloid native americans. They're obviously the remnants of the armies send by Genghis Khan to conquer the New World, that were defeated by the legitimate white populations that have always lived there.

Just because there aren't loads of fossilised ocean vessels doesn't mean there weren't any. What about all those Mayan months that have almost exactly the same names as Hindu ones?

Drifting on a raft across Indonesian islands to reach Australia is very easy when compared to drifting across an ocean.

Personally I find it staggering how humans made it to Australia. Not many people can fit on a raft and you can't direct where to go.
lol, ur so rite, but since alot of Austrialians are white, does dat mean their ancestors might be European? (Europeans floating on raft to Austrailia, almost impossible :/)

wow.
Are you that oblivious? Isn't it obvious that the continent that boasts kangaroos, platypus' and kola bears can't also create a type of man that reflects (according to my knowledge) a 18th century british prisoner, on rafts the seemed to resemble ships of said time period, that enjoys surfing, beer, gater wrestling, and faking accents to attract tourists while they really sound like peruvians when no foreigners are around? I dont wanna hear your huppery-buckery about colonization, coincidences do occur, and this is one of them. James Cook (pronounced kook) theory. look it up. Quite interestingMATE!

:eek: Oh my god i found a rock in europe and then i found one that looked just like it in my back yard.

ur all wrong... they "evolved" from monkeys!!! :D

stupid evolutionists

Since no one has posted a map yet, I think I will.


http://www.waughfamily.ca/Ancient/ancestry5_large.jpg

Pls do not bump old threads. Thank you.