:^) There are those (who obviously have their own ethnic axes to grind) who claim "they" have always been here, that their ancestors were made in the Americas, and didn't come from anywhere else.
The problem of course is, Canada and the Arctic is known to have been repopulated by sea, probably during the centuries AD, and all the so-called 1st nations merely claim to have always lived where the current ones (and alleged ones) live. By and large that isn't true by a long shot.
A continuity of human navigation is a threat to that paradigm.
“There are those (who obviously have their own ethnic axes to grind) who claim “they” have always been here, that their ancestors were made in the Americas, and didn’t come from anywhere else.”
If they have a creation story then they obviously know they have not “always been there”. A more fair context would be “As long as we can remember we have always been here”. And if you have been in the same place for 13,000 years and do not actually remember how you got there “We have always been here” is a fair claim since they have no knowledge of any other reality. It would even be fair for the Norse to claim “We have always been here” based on what they remember. They have lost how they actually got there. So to the “best of their knowledge” it would be a fair claim to say “We have always been here”.
In reality in between the lines the big argument and controversy is “Did we displace anyone who was here before us.” The first Norse to the north did not, the first to Australia did not, the first to Japan did not, and the first to the Americas did not. These absolutely have a right to claim to be first without displacing someone because they were.