Wasn’t the ocean level lower during the period of initial migration? I’ve heard that mentioned from several sources but I’m not a sciencer so no real clue what’s valid or not.
If it is true, then all this back and forth about when and how in the migration is just the yammering of prancing dilettantes. If archaeologists wont go to where the evidence is, then they’re just pretending to be sciencers.
Yes. That is why there was land between Siberian and Alaska, where now there is the Bering Straight. Sea levels were lower by some 400+ feet at the height of the last ice age.
If it is true, then all this back and forth about when and how in the migration is just the yammering of prancing dilettantes. If archaeologists wont go to where the evidence is, then they’re just pretending to be sciencers.
False. (I am a "sciencer" so I do have a clue).
The standard theory of human migration to the Americas has involved the land bridge. As research progressed, and dating became more accurate, the date of that land bridge grew younger, while the dates of archaeological sites in South American grew older. Pretty soon these two events merged, showing that there had to be other sources of humans coming into the Americas.
The early coastal migration is one such source; people came from the vicinity of Alaska and traveled down the west coasts of both North and South America before the poor folks trudging through Canada got very far. The current discussions of Clovis and connections to Europe are still another possibility for migration to the east coast. And there are other possibilities as well.
As far as "yammering of prancing dilettantes," "if archaeologists wont go to where the evidence is," and "they’re just pretending to be sciencers" -- I strongly suggest you put a cork in it. I have been a professional archaeologist for a lot of years and we're doing the best we can.
But if you think you can do better, get out there and do something. Maybe you could be a "sciencer" someday too!