More supporting evidence continues to be discovered, indicating that modern man appeared in various places of the Earth at earlier stages of development instead of developing in one place and spreading out from there. This is also the case in the Americas. Modern man has been found to have been there long before the timeline of the conventional theory which assumes modern man first come out of Africa, finally making his way to the Americas less than 20,000 years ago.
In quoting the appearance of modern man from conventional sources, there is a dominant paradigm amongst scientist that there are no signs of modern man in the Americas, any earlier than around 15,000 years ago, and perhaps a few thousand years earlier than that.
But archaeological discoveries found in Mexico around the mid 20th century reveals archaeological evidence that indicates development of stone tools and rock engravings of modern man. These are much older than 18,000 years. These findings compare with the traces of early modern man in the other great continents of the world.
Below is a link and extracts of a report on the book: The First American by Christopher Hardaker. It is about the archaeological evidence found in Mexico that proves that man did not first go to the Americas across the land bridge of Siberia some fifteen thousand years ago, but that he lived there much earlier, at the same stage of development as man in Eurasia, Africa and Ocea, some 40,000 and more years ago.
Therefore it is not out of bounds, for valid hypotheses to conjecture that he did not originally migrate to those areas from Africa, but that he appeared there, around the same time he appeared in other areas of the world. And this is consistent with Oahspe which reveals that the second appearance of I’huans upon the earth was around 39,000 years ago. (Oahspe, Synopsis of Sixteen Cycles.)
According to the report, while geological evidence seems to show that stone tools found in Valsequillo, Mexico, date back to perhaps 40,000 years ago (by measurement of layers believed to be deposited by water only), the carbon dating showed that they were 250,000 years old!
Carbon dating is controversial, and becomes less reliable the older the sample tested, especially more than a few tens of thousands of years. While it may be that the sedimentary evidence is correct in this case, there is a potential for miscalculating geological time in the assumption that all layering can be attributed to erosion by weathering and water or volcanic activity only. A'ji and nebulae from the atmosphere form deposits over far shorter periods than general erosion. But even so, the evidence does support the view that early modern man was in the Americas as well as in Asia, Europe Africa and Australia around the same period of development.
According to Oahspe, the deposition of corporeal substance described below shows that cities can be buried by falling A'ji so quickly that their inhabitants can see it happening:
Bk of Divinity, Chapter 23,
||17.....And yet mortals saw not the a'ji; saw their cities and temples, as it were,
sinking in the ground; but they sank not [were not actually sinking but were being buried];
it was the a'ji falling and condensing.||
The following extract shows that the fall of A'ji was not always over all the lands of earth:
Bk of Wars, Chapter 16,
||3. The mathematicians discovered there would fall no a'ji in Yaton'te, nor on
the lands of Guatama. So, God sent from several divisions in the heavens laborers
for those regions.||
||The First American by Christopher Hardaker..... This is the story of a remarkable art piece discovered in 1959 by an equally remarkable man at the Valsequillo Reservoir outside the city of Puebla, about 75 miles south of Mexico City. Juan Armenta Camacho stunned the world with his discovery of a mineralized elephant pelvis with engravings of elephants, big cats, and other extinct animals.
The engravings had been made when the bone was still fresh, still "green." Whoever made these engravings actually saw those animals, and probably even ate and prayed to them. The most amazing critter of them all was smack dab in the middle of the thing. A four- tusked gomphothere, an ancestor of the mastodon, and [supposedly] extinct in the U.S. for over a million years.
But in Central Mexico, these mythical beasts lived among mammoths and mastodons. And humans. This was absolutely amazing. Other engraved pieces were also found. Nobody in the Americas had ever seen anything like this before. They were all mineralized! It was totally new in every meaning of the word, except for their age which could be very old.
Harvard archaeologist Cynthia Irwin-Williams and Juan Armenta Camacho, with direct support from Harvard and the Smithsonian, found another 80-90 mammoth and mastodon bone sites around the perimeter of the reservoir in 1962. Then they excavated three sites on the Tetela Peninsula. All had artifacts next to mineralized bones that were left behind after butchering,
The sites themselves were laid out pretty much how the hunters left them. The features were covered by successive layers of sands and silts deposited by a very slow creek, and were laid out in the same positions as they were originally buried. In the business of paleo- archaeology, it is called primary deposition, and in this respect, Valsequillo was pure gold.
For example, Irwin-Williams found a horse jaw, and a tooth from it was an inch away from the jaw. This meant virtually no bone movement when they were buried. About a half inch away was a stone knife. It was an immaculate feature; so good that they sawed it out in a square block, a portable feature destined for the national museum. It was just priceless. For the people of Mexico it meant national pride. The city of Puebla began celebrating as The Eden of the Americas. It was all there in that feature block.
This feature block was later vandalized and destroyed by the Mexican archaeologist who signed the official dig permits; this was the same official who would later falsely testify that the artifacts were planted. This charge was laughably dispatched by Irwin-Williams's three thousand photographs detailing the excavation and extraction of each piece - also currently missing.
The real problem was that the bones were mineralized. C14 dating was useless. For six years, nobody knew how old these sites were. It was absolutely frustrating.
Here you are with a trio of neighboring sites that were very probably the earliest ever uncovered in the New World. Everything was perfect, except … you could not date the sites.
At the time, 1968, the oldest site in the Americas clocked in at 12,000 years (aka 10,000 BC). Crossing the Siberian landbridge to Alaska, the Clovis mammoth killers arrived with their ultra-sleek spearheads, maybe the best on the planet at the time............
Valsequillo's artifact types were definitely those of modern man. Simple retouched points made out of chert flakes were found in the older artifact beds, while higher up in the younger, more recent beds, they found full-fledged spearheads and knives, bifacially flaked. They were modern, alright. But they were also much more primitive than the immaculate Clovis points.......
The modern period starts with the Old World Upper Paleolithic period, around 30-40,000 years ago. This was the beginning of modern man, Homo sapiens sapiens, "man who thinks he thinks." The blade-to-biface revolution happened over there also. And now for the first time in the New World, this critical phase of technological evolution turns up in the New World, in Central Mexico. This was huge in itself. The theoretical potentials of such discoveries would be shattering. The artifacts, the art and the sandy-silt matrix immediately challenged the Clovis Firsters. Dr. Wormington even conceded that Valsequillo could be 40,000 years......
In 1968, a USGS geologist suggested using his new Uranium Series technique to date the bone, and that's when everything fell apart.
The bone dates from the Tetela sites were 250,000 years old! And so opened up one of the craziest archaeological wormholes in history. That's a quarter million years old! Modern man didn't live back then, and all the artifacts from Valsequillo were fancy spearheads and blades - things we Mods didn't know how to make until 30-40,000 years ago. And there was art! And Valsequillo was 250,000 years old? That's Homo erectus Time!! And there's art?
It not only threatened to trash the American paradigm of prehistory, it would also trash the Old World paradigm for the last phases of human evolution. This was serious. There were modern stone tools in Mexico that were 200,000 years older than the earliest modern tools in Europe and Asia and Africa. It was nuts. It was impossible any way you looked at it.
Geologists kept coming up with similar ages for the site no matter what they threw at it. And no matter what the geological sciences turned up, the archaeological community fought back with a stifling wall of absolute silence and noncomment. They would have none of it. Period. The wormhole became an academic black hole, the region became a forbidden zone, and Valsequillo dropped from the lips of credibility.
In the end the archaeologists won through silence. Irwin-Williams never published an official volume; not even site reports. And the curiousity that raged through the professional community was calmly checked at the door of credibility. The archaeologists would not work with the geologists unless they recanted their "ridiculous" dates. The geologists could not do this. Every time they dated the site with different dating techniques, the site came out as old or older than 200,000 years. And it would take a lot more than catcalls by angry archaeologists to make the geologist betray the scientific laws governing their evidence. Science is not opinion, but that was all the archaeologists could muster. And in the end, the archaeologists won by default, by absolute noncomment; not even a whisper. And that was pretty much that.
Had it not been for a lone hold out geologist from the original project, one of America's greatest archaeology stories would have been lost to the fog of professional amnesia. She was able to recover the archives of Irwin-Williams, who had passed away several years earlier. Letters, notes, some photos and other materials would show that Valsequillo was pure archaeological gold. It may not have been the earliest contender for the preClovis throne, but it was simply the best..........||
As a reference, the extract and link below provides details on evidence regarding modern man in the America's, after the submersion of Pan (the flood). This is acceptable to conventional scientists since it does not radically contradict the belief that modern man first appeared Africa and arrived in the Americas across the Bering Strait less than 20,000 years ago :
||Most people probably wouldn't have noticed it, but farmer Harold Conover in 1988 happened to see a stone spear point in the sand on a logging road near his farm in Carson, Va. Conover is not an archaeologist, but he recognized it as a Clovis spear point because there is a known Clovis site on his farm.
He tracked the point to a sand pit owned by the International Paper Co. at the Cactus Hill site, about 70 km south of Richmond, Va., overlooking the Nottoway River.
That chance discovery triggered a decade-long excavation that eventually might resolve the ongoing, often bitter controversy over when humans first migrated to North America. The spear point itself wasn't unusually old, but it led archaeologists Joseph and Lynn McAvoy to a prehistoric campsite that might be as many as 17,000 years old — 5,500 years older than the Clovis sites previously thought to be the oldest on this continent.
About 57-75 cm below the surface they found a campsite containing an ancient hearth, scrapers, woodworking tools and several Clovis spear points. Radiocarbon dating of charcoal from the hearth showed it to be about 10,900 years old, appropriate for a Clovis site.
Digging further, they found a second campsite about 10-15 cm lower, again with hearths and stone tools. The tools were distinctly different. Instead of quartzite Clovis spear points, the tools from the lower camp were made of chert and were of a more primitive form called blade flakes or core blades. Radiocarbon dating revealed the hearth was at least 15,000 years old and perhaps as much as 17,000. The findings indicate that humans have lived in North America much longer than most researchers believed, and hint that their origins might be different from what had been believed.
Other archaeologists have made claims for a number of sites in both North and South America, some apparently dating as far back as 35,000 years. The dates of those sites, however, and the validity of the artifacts found there, are disputed.
Data presented last month by Joseph McAvoy and a team of archaeologists at the Society for American Archaeology meeting in Philadelphia seem to have firmly established the age of the Virginia site, called Cactus Hill.
"This is probably some of the oldest material in North America, if not the entire New World," said archaeologist Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History.
The Cactus Hill site is one of several that are overturning the long- reigning theory of how humans first came to the Americas. Archaeologists always assumed that the first inhabitants walked across the Bering Strait to Alaska when ice covered its surface about 12,000 years ago........
The Smithsonian's Stanford, however, thinks the tools are remarkably similar to somewhat older tools recently discovered in Spain and France. He suggests that those proto- Spaniards might have sailed across the Atlantic 18,000 years ago or more.
Not everyone is convinced. Archaeologist David Meltzer of Southern Methodist University questions the fact that the two campsites discovered at Cactus Hill, separated in time by several thousand years, are separated in space by only 7-10 cm. "There should have been more soil-forming processes over that period," he said, so that the early site was more deeply buried. ||