Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
11. Hmm, maybe some supporting evidence.
Sat Mar 3, 2012, 08:20 AM
Mar 2012
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/paleo/peltice.pl

This is a reconstruction of ice coverage for land. Over a short period of time (a few thousand years) after the last glacial maximum, the ice sheets shrank and sea levels rose dramatically.

So your "sudden appearance across wide ranges" correlates well with the existing population moving inland at that time.

The Barbados levels are probably the best index to use for what would have happened to any human populations in the Americas at that time. See page 4 of this article and look at the remarkable two-hump figure:
http://people.uncw.edu/grindlayn/GLY550/Fairbanks-Sealevel-1989.pdf
The thin double-humped line is the corrected time version. The sea was rising very rapidly at that time.

So your theory seems to match well with the geological evidence.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Anthropology»Where is everyone? Anybod...»Reply #11