Posted on

Australian Americans?

Over the last decade, all manner of unexpected archaeological discoveries have led to many experts questioning much of what was assumed to be fact. A large variety of unexpected findings have called into question many elemental assumptions held about the past. These include the discovery of little “hobbits” on Flores Island; Siberian hominids with mtDNA connections to the people of Papua New Guinea (PNG); and the purity of our distinct genetic Homo sapiens code being compromised by a Neanderthal component of 4%.

Professor Clive Gamble of Southampton University succinctly summarized the current impasse and polarization this has caused, when declaring we have to construct “a completely new map of the world and how we peopled it.” Granted, our response to Gamble’s call may seem radical; however, these discoveries, found not only in America but throughout the entire Indo-Pacific Region, all point to the same ancient southern location as the key to the new cartography.

After extensive consultation and research, we are of the opinion that at some time in the distant past, no less than 50,000 years ago and possibly much earlier, Original men and women set sail from Australia and began exploring foreign lands. They were the bearers of new insights and options, and bequeathed humanity their genes and the cornerstones of a genuinely civilized civilization: religion, culture, gender equality, art, sailing, democracy, astronomy, and surgery.


The Australian Americans

The recent discoveries of “hundreds of skeletal remains” in America that “look like Australian Aborigines” indicate that early immigrations were more likely from Australia than to it. In the October/November 2011 edition of Cosmos, Jacqui Hayes presented a compelling morphological case in support of an Australian Original presence in America. According to Hayes, Original settlement of the Americas began at an indeterminate time before the second migration of people “with distinctive Mongoloid features,” and that “startling new finds suggest Australia’s first people made it all the way to South America more than 11,000 years ago.” This leaves an unresolved question. How far back did these original settlements span? Were there other locations settled? If, indeed, Hayes is right, in that Australian Original people were the first to enter America, any artifact or indication of human activity dated as more than 11,000 years old must be related to people bearing Australian Original genes.

The impossibility of any ancient African migration to America having occurred was confirmed through the examination of Original bones that established the presence of distinctive antigens. “Arnaiz-Vilena and his team looked at the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) system, which is a group of proteins on the surface of human immune cells. The HLAs are what doctors test for to determine whether one person’s tissues are compatible for organ or bone transplants. HLA is a nuclear marker giving an even genealogy and genetic history for both sexes—the best test showing that HLA is a good genetic marker for studying population relatedness in that it usually correlates with geography.”

As expected, the first nominee was Australian, but just as importantly the comparative results bore witness to one genetic type which was notably missing; it seems the Africans forgot to sign on for this distinctive genetic marker. “So what did they find? Unique signatures only found in Australian Aborigines, Pacific Islanders, and peoples in Asia, and even in Europe.” The nonappearance of African HLA is yet another inconvenient piece of evidence for anyone wishing to hold onto the theory that Eve was an African.

When factoring in these recent additions to the Australian Original/American time line, dates just exceeding the maximum Clovis (Mongoloid) entry date are certainly inconvenient to established theory, but they do not demand tearing out pages from standard text books… yet. There is a substantial amount of corroborating evidence of Original presence in the Americas during the 10,000 years before the second migration from Asia began. It can be found at Tlapacoya, 21,700–25,000 years before present (BP), Los Toldos Cave, Patagonia, 14,000–15,000 BP, Meadowbank Rockshelter 19,000 BP (southwest Pennsylvania), Tibito 14,400 BP (Colombia), Walker 15,000 BP (Minnesota), and Mud Lake 13,450 BP (Wisconsin).

But it doesn’t stop there. Professor Silvia Gonzalez, who is a leading advocate of the Out-of-Australia Theory (OAusT), was “quite staggered” by the dates obtained when analyzing the footprints found in a layer of volcanic ash at Lake Valsequillo (Mexico). “A variety of prints (human and animal) captured in this layer of rock were dated using optically stimulated luminescence (O.S.L.).” She found, much to her understandable surprise, that 40,000 years was established as the “last time that these sediments were lit by the sun’s rays or the last time that the material was heated.” Gonzalez is adamant that these are Australian Original footprints and that they were left by people who reached America by boat by “island hopping” around the Pacific Basin.

Such a date, 40,000 years, pushes the boundaries and affirms the reality of an extensive Original tenure in the Americas. Nor is this an isolated bit of evidence. The corroborative timing of Albert Goodyear’s site cannot be a coincidence, and the considerable distance between locations strengthens its significance. “Goodyear had been working at an archaeological site on the Savannah river, near Topper. It was agreed all the available evidence from the Clovis site had been gathered and their work was complete . . . He kept digging for another four meters before an assortment of stone tools, along with a hearth, were unearthed. A small piece of charcoal was then analyzed by counting the residual Carbon 14, and a date of no less than 37,000 years was deemed appropriate.”

Uncomfortable as these dates are for anyone clinging to traditional theories in relation to when ancient Australian Originals first came to America, for such individuals it gets worse. Not far from the Lake Valsequillo footprints Gonzalez investigated, is another site that was deliberately ignored for close to thirty years after Cynthia Irwin-Williams conducted a comprehensive investigation. The dates are so sensational and numerous, and so obviously associated with objects made by Homo sapiens, the archaeologists downed their tools and clipboards and vowed never to return. The dates returned by a variety of sound geological analyses were far too ancient, not only for a presence in the Americas but well outside the assumed period when Homo sapiens first appeared on earth! To some extent the issue isn’t just a matter of whether these numbers are feasible, it is more a case of open antagonism between two competing branches of science.

Christopher Hardaker, author of The First American, created a fictional conversation between the two competing parties which graphically highlights how much the argument over which group of academics have the right to exclusively claim victory has blinded the combatants.

ARCHAEOLOGIST: You are asking us to believe that the sophisticated art and technology of the Upper Paleolithic was actually invented over 200,000 years ago in Central Mexico by Homo erectus? Ridiculous.

GEOLOGIST: You are asking us to believe that Science is off by a magnitude of 10? Ridiculous!

Often the result of cutting-edge technology, the chemical analysis and computations came from extremely reputable institutions and individuals. Some of the techniques performed upon the layer of volcanic ash and debris deposited above the artifacts and footprints which delivered the offending dates include Uranium Series Dating (200,000 years); Zircon Fission Track (170,000–640,000 years); mineral solutions (200,000 years); Diatom analysis (80,000 years); U-Th/He (200,000 years); tephrahydration (250,000 years); magnetic shifts in rocks (790,000 years); and argon argon (1,300,000 years). The facts, and large figures, demand a response. What if just one date is actually right? Does that mean Homo sapiens were, as Christopher Hardaker claims, responsible for “600,000 year old art?”

As to whether Gonzalez’ “island hopping” route from Australia, up through Asia, Japan, Siberia, then America is plausible, it is often said a picture can act as a worthy substitute for quite a few words. German anthropologist, Dr. Hermann Klaatsch, took a photograph of a Japanese full-descent Ainu Elder in the late nineteenth century. The physical characteristics displayed in this photograph are strikingly similar to those of an Australian Aborigine, as are those of “a very well-preserved skeleton from Gua Gunung, Malaysia,” which was recently discovered and about which it was reported “[this] specimen is aged 10,200 BP and is said to be a late representative of a non-specialized morphology, similar to Australian Aborigines.”

The First Boat

For traces of a population “similar to Australian Aboriginals” to be present in Malaysia, Japan, America, or any other place, a boat is needed. The oft-proposed settlement of Australia from Africa by ramshackle raft, or through desperately clinging on to driftwood during storms, doesn’t measure up. This vessel must be able to withstand monsoons and weeks at sea. It must accommodate a crew of close to twenty adults so that the settlers in their new home can avoid inbreeding and successfully populate an uninhabited continent. Nowhere today is anyone going to discover the actual ancient wooden remains of such an ancient sophisticated “ocean-going” vessel. However, if there is no actual wreckage to be found, there is, nonetheless, other evidence of a seafaring tradition among the ancient Australians.

Graham Walsh was the widely recognized authority on the intriguing Bradshaw art of the Kimberley area… Within this area, he has discovered the oldest paintings of boats in the world, dated at a minimum age of 17,000 years, but with the strong possibility of being up to 50,000 years old… Walsh insisted that the” “high prow of the boat” is “unnecessary for boats used in calm, inland waters. The design suggests it was used on the open ocean.” Walsh was quite shocked by the function, antiquity, and most importantly, dimensions of these vessels: “they are massive boats, totally alien.” Moreover, not only was the sophistication and technology exhibited difficult for Walsh to assimilate, he still had to account for the reasons why there were “two paintings of ocean-going boats, one with 23 people on board, the other 29.”

These are ideal numbers for founding populations sailing towards distant lands. However, diagrams and specifications of themselves do not make a boat. To have a clever idea is a promising first step, but there are some practicalities to be addressed before an actual nautical expedition can be embarked upon. There are materials, tools, and navigation skills required which supposedly did not exist for at least another 20,000 years. Irrespective of what is assumed, the first tool needed to build a ship that can comfortably cater for thirty people is an axe. Wood in its prime, not the rotting logs that fall by themselves, is essential in manufacturing a vessel strong enough to sail across oceans.

It should come as no surprise that the oldest axe in the world, dated as 40,000 years old, was found at Huon Terrace P.N.G. (which was part of the Australian mainland until 8,000 years ago). Others discovered are also incredibly old, like the examples found in Jaowyn land, Northern Territory (35,500 years), at Sandy Creek, Queensland (32,000 years), and Malangangerr Northern Territory (23,000). All of these are at least 8,000 years older than the first axe found outside Australia, at Niah Cave, Sarawak, which is dated as 15,000 years old.

With axe at hand, plans on the wall, and overseas bookings made, there still remains one vital seafaring skill any journey beyond landfall demands: navigation. Hugh Cairns’s book, Dark Sparklers, is the first and only publication dedicated to the sharing of traditional Original astronomical knowledge. Cairns won the trust of Wardaman Elder, Bill Harnley, who spoke of his ancestral knowledge of the stars, “great black shapes” the movements and constellations in between, and of up “on top.” According to Cairns, there have been Original astronomers for “over 30,000 years.”

Not only the Pacific but the Indian Ocean was navigated by ancient Australians who brought many esoteric gifts, technologies, guidelines and, of course, their genes to distant continents. “Dr. Raghavendra Rao and researchers from the Indian-backed Anthropological Survey of India project found unique mutations were shared between modern-day Indians and Aborigines.” They “identified seven people from central Dravidian and Austro-Asiatic tribes who shared genetic traits only found in Aborigines.”

Much earlier linguistic studies of the Dravidian language had already identified a relationship between the two peoples. Dravidian “fishermen of the Madras coast use almost the same words for I, thou, he, we, and you as some Aboriginal tribes. Many other key words in the Dravidian dialects are identical to Tasmanian Aboriginal terms both in pronunciation and meaning.”

“It needs to be appreciated that Tasmanian culture and language is a relatively recent event, and the island is the outcome of the final thawing at the end of the last Ice Age when the seas covered the low plains between Victoria and Tasmania. Over the last 8,000 years this isolation has been instrumental in the development of a distinctive Tasmanian culture.” With a language that came into existence no earlier than 8,000 years ago forming a substantial part of the basic Dravidian vocabulary, this mtDNA connection strongly suggests the Australian Originals kept in contact with India for some considerable time. The cultural connection is further emphasized by the fact that “Australian canoes are constructed identically to those of the coastal Dravidian tribes of India, and wild tribes in the Deccan region of India are the only culture known to use the boomerang outside Australia.”

The oldest boomerang discovered in the world was found at Wyrie Swamp, South Australia, and is dated at 10,200 years. That the dingo is accepted to have been brought into Australia from somewhere in Asia about 6,000 years ago only strengthens the possibility of a history of extended Australo-Indian interaction being fact. It would appear that the Dravidians adopted the Australian boomerang to hunt with, chose their better designed canoes to assist in fishing and, as is often the case when two cultures first meet, shared technology, friendship, and genes.


The above is an edited excerpt from the new book by Steven and Evan Strong, Out of Australia, Aborigines, the Dreamtime, and the Dawn of the Human Race, published by Hampton Roads, presented here with the publisher’s permission.

Lost History

May/June2017 – #123