The True Ancestors of North America
Critical Thinking Questions (Follow formatting guidelines in syllabus)
- What is the Topic-Purpose (Subject Matter) of the video/article?
The topic purpose of the article is to explain who were the earliest or the first occupants of America using archeological studies. The article explores the different dating styles in a bid to establish the significance of the claims presented by the different parties. The author tries to present different arguments about dating and how they affected the war between the native-American and the non-natives on who were the true ancestors of America. The native Americans are of the idea that they were the first inhabitants of America while other archeologists use the dating methods such as carbon-dating, Clovis spears and bars and others to refute the claim that native Americans were first to inhabit America. Some archeologists to claim that other human beings existed before the Clovis man refute use of the Clovis spears. Those in support of the claim that Native Americans were are the ancestors of the first people to inhabit America mostly make use of assumptions rather than facts to support their claims.
- Are there any assumptions/arguments, gaps/absences, issues, problems, interpretations? Is any info missing or possibly avoided in the video/article?
Yes, there are gaps in the assumptions claiming that the authenticity of claim that there existed other humans before the Clovis man. The archaeologists have failed to find answers that there existed other human beings to that prehistory question. Moreover, it raises concerns why the Clovis spears declined after the Clovis man first used them. Moreover, the Clovis bar, which is intended to mean that there was human life in America before the Clovis stage, has not been studied into details to authenticate the claims. Additionally, ability of archaeology to provide answers to prehistory questions raises concerns. If it has the ability to provide answers to prehistory questions, why has it taken too much to do it? Its inability to answers the prehistoric questions gives room for people to develop claims that have no factual or logical support. The assumption that existence of Clovis man meant that there were other people before them is questionable since no prove has been made.
- Authority – Are alternative possibilities and interpretation explored that simulate further study?
Yes, new alternative possibilities are being explored to explain and spurn further studies. For instance, it is evident that studies to establish when the earliest man stepped in America begun even archaeology come into existence. If the earliest information can be incorporated into studies, approach that is more comprehensive can be adopted. Moreover, discovery of ancient man in other parts of world can help to spur studies to establish who the earliest man in North America was. The fact that evidence has been found to support existence of man in other parts of the world means the same is possible in the North America.
- What did you learn from the article/video?
From the article, I have learnt that extensive archaeological studies are needed to prove claims raised concerning prehistoric matters. Archaeological assumptions without support of facts can ruin the future of archaeology since the media has a tendency of reporting and publicizing such assumptions without looking for evidence. Moreover, different archaeologists are led by their own perceptions in their studies. Therefore, there is need for coordinated archaeological studies to enhance credibility of the results.
