North America before the Younger Dryas

Some studies claim early habitation of North America.

Of course Clovis-first is cods, has been known as cods since (at least) Dillehay in the 1990s. That's a strawman. And I agree that the LGM 25-17 kBC was no time to be journeying into the Americas. Ship tech from across the Pacific wasn't up to it either. Genetics point away from any Across Atlantic Ice intrusion.

And yet: Ciprian Ardelean at Universidad Autonoma de Zacatecas sees 30 kBC human spoor in Mexican cave Chiquihuite. Elsewhere around Parias (as I like to call early North "America"), Oxford researchers claim 42 sites up to 17 kBC. As Ardelean notes, anything that old had to have got there in the first place "BEFORE" (his caps) the LGM; therefore, vindication for his cave.

At a guess, Ardelean's numbers are off. His cave is unique for the 30 kBC range, and radiocarbon that old simply isn't good. But I do not guess his numbers so far off to discount his main point.

Also not good for 30 kBC... is DNA. We need one of those well-preserved skulls or fingerbones as we had for Denisova. Early modern man liked to live down in the tropics, not up in the steppes or mountains or deserts.

I expect NOT to be dining on crow for my anti-Solutrean stance. To this day we've no American record of Europe (nor Africa) prior to Amerigo. But I must concede that remains this early have opened the question again. More likely is [para]Melanesian as seen in Amazon DNA.

UPDATE 7/23: Razib agrees. As to why the Americas are so predominantly ANC-A and ANC-B with little else: There is no evidence of Oase Aurignacians in modern Europeans. His term for "paramelanesian" is Clade-2 East Eurasian.