= new reply since forum marked as read
What do they mean? The earth is only 6,000 years old. 
...or something. 
C'mon, get with the program.
TYY
Remember. 24,000 year ago was the height of the last Glacial maximum (About 20,000 to 26, 500 years ago)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Glacial_Maximum
The Grand Banks were land and connected to North America. Iceland was twice as big as it is today. Not only was England attached to Europe, so was Ireland and the water in between PLUS additional ocean land to Ireland's West and Scotland's north and west. At least two large Islands existed between Scotland and Iceland.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Sea_Level_During_Last_Ice_Age.htm
That the permanent ice of the Arctic lasted till about 8000 years ago is roughly the same area as the last ice age Maximum, and that includes most of England, Ireland, Scotland, Iceland and North America north of Delaware.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AGUFMPP12A..01A
http://curryja.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/document.pdf
Here is a cite supporting the concept of movement from Europe to North America:
http://www.naturaleater.com/science-articles/north_atlantic_ice-edge_corridor.pdf
Here is a cite attacking the concept of movement from Europe to North America:
http://cladistics.coas.missouri.edu/pdf_articles/Eren_et_al_2013.pdf
Now, the Map of the World 24,000 years ago is from a Mormon Site. While facts can not be disputed (and the map reflects common concepts of sea level 24,000 years ago), how to interpret those facts can be. According to the Book Of Mormon, a white people lived in North America till exterminated by Native Americans, but they left a book, called the Book Of Mormon that Joseph Smith found and translated into English. For this reason many Mormon's looks for facts that can support such a history and will often jump to conclusions based on very flimsy evidence.
Native Americans know of this tendency of the Mormons and are often just as quick to attack any indication of immigration from Europe prior to the Vikings (and under the right set of facts, Native Americas will even support the even earlier Irish reports of reaching what we think is North America).
This clash of beliefs raises its head in regards to the report of Clovis points and how they came to North America. While the first Clovis points were found in Clovis New Mexico, the majority of such points are from the East Coast and seems to have moved from the East Coats to Clovis New Mexico not the other way around (I use the word "seems" for the data is weak for Clovis points are dated from the material they are found in, not from anything on the point itself).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clovis_point
Thus it is possible for a group of Western Europeans to walk from Western Europe to North America up to about 8000 years ago. It was a dangerous walk for you would be walking on ice that is floating on water (and it would be slowly melting). As such the ice can break up as you walk on it, or smash up and cover you up as you walk on it (and some times both at the same time). Please note the above is in GOOD WEATHER, in bad weather it would be worse. On the other hand it is doable.
Now, some of the land off North America would have become flooded by 8000 years ago, the Grand Banks would still have been above ground, with the ice sheets reaching them in winter.
The only real issue would be food, and that can be taken based on fish they can find in the open sea and land creature under the ice surface (and that have to come up to breath is breathing holes such large mammals need). I do not see a small, nuclear family size, group, but an extended family, including first and second cousins doing this trip. Such a clan is small enough to be able to live off the game it can catch, and large enough to handle the large sea mammals they would be hunting. I do not seem them using boats except for short off shore movements (no where near what the Inuit, Eskimos, can do today) for we are talking old Stone age not New Stone age groups. I do see them using needles and sewing, but no weaving.
The first New Stone age groups appear about 10,200 years ago:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic
While I suspect the European Groups to be Old Age people, I suspect the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States
While the Ancestors of Native Americans had the upper hands in numbers, the Clovis point could have become something to trade for (and one of the top trade items would be women, and that would be a two way street). Given what I suspect is a large population difference, the European groups would be slowly absorbed by the Native American groups.
Please note, it is generally believed that the First Native Americas were already New Stone Age people (Neolithic). Presently Neolithic Cultures are divided into three sub types in the old world, five in the New World. The New Word Division is as follows:
The Lithic stage
The Archaic stage
The Formative stage
The Classic stage
The Post-Classic stage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithic_stage
The key is at the time Neolithic starts about 12,200 years ago. That is also the time period when the Ancestors of Modern Native Americans cross into the New World (Sea levels raise after wards, making the Bering Land Bridge the Bering straits). It appears that such early Native Americas were primitive but still Neolithic people. No permanent homes, no farming, but larger groups are becoming the norm and with that larger group better equipment and dress (Better dress including sewing and weaving important is being able to dress for the cold temperatures of that part of the world).
Sewing Needles and Weaving had been known in late Paleolithic times (old stone age) but boomed with the onset of the Neolithic age. The Bow and Arrow seems to have been invented about the time of the switch to the Neolithic age (mostly do to the fact the Bow and Arrow are sophisticated tools that require special skills to make, unlike the earlier Atlatl, or spear thrower, which anyone could in theory make) but does NOT appear to have reached North America till about 2000 BC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_archery#North_America
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weaving
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewing#Origins
In many ways sewing and weaving seems to be the big switch between Neolithic and Paleolithic ages. The record is unclear for this was done by people on the move, we just see it is the improved clothes most Neolithic people wear when compared to Paleolithic sites.
The Atlatl or Spear Thrower was invented about 25,000 years ago and is clearly an Paleolithic invention (and with Paleolithic people reached Australia) but as slowly replaced by the Bow.
Compared to the Bow, the Atlatl could throw a more powerful spear at a target and when it hit what it was aimed at do more damage. Another advantage of the Atlati is that compared to the bow it is primitive. Once you understand how it work you can make a very good one yourself and learn to use it. A good bow and good arrows are much harder to make. Yew was the preferred wood in the old world. In the New World, Osage quickly became the preferred wood (In Central Asia which did not have access to either tree, the composited bow was preferred, a bow made up of various items from wood to bone).
The actual construction of a Bow can be done in a day (for a composite bow a week) BUT that assumes you have all the components already made, and making those components can take months. In the days of stone tools, "cutting" a bow out of a tree could take weeks and then months making sure the bow properly dried. The bow String had to be made out of Sinew (which are the tendons which connect muscle to bone) for nothing else was as strong (other materials were used, but all would break way before Sinew would). The Tendons had to be cut away, then dried and wrapped with other dried Tendon to make a long enough Bow String. This took time and you had to make sure every scavengers around (including crows) would leave the Sinew alone till it was dry (and then afterward when it was in storage). A Archer would carry 2-3 bow string in case one broke (today, artificial materials are used, but that is a post WWII invention, not relevant to the issue here).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinew.
The arrows themselves were a problem, until Aluminum became the material of choice for archers, the choice was Bamboo or Cedar. Since Bamboo only exists in Eastern Asia (including China) and South east Asia (India to Vietnam), everyone else used Cedar. if you could fine it AND if you could get enough pieces made that were straight. Another problem are the feathers of the Arrow, Today we used Plastic, prior to the invention of Plastic actual bird feather, but NOT any bird feather, the feathers on the wing, and generally only one or two on each wing (and all three feathers on an arrow has to be about the same size AND from the same wing of the bird).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow
http://www.trueflightfeathers.com/faq.htm
Just pointing out that prior to plastics and modern materials, Bows AND arrows were expensive to produce and it appears to be the chief reason it took centuries for people to give up Throwing Spears for the Bow.
Now while more time consuming to produce, the Bow had the advantage of more accuracy (thus more effective on smaller game), longer range (could hit an area target up to about 250 yards, a head size target up to 100 yards, unlike the Atlati's 80 yard range and that is against an Area Target) and be reloaded quicker. Thus the bow slowly replaced the Atlati except among those people going after big game (the Inuit for example).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spear-thrower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longbow
What I mean by "Area Target" is a target larger then one object. The Classic example is a group of soldiers opposite your group of soldiers. You do not aim at any one person in that group, but at the group as a whole. A good example of such "area target" is seen in the 1903 Springfield Rifle. The 1903 Springfield Rifle had sights up to 3000 yards. With those open sights a person could hit a man size target up to 1000 yards away. The sights were up to 3000 yards, for in 1903 it was believed that infantrymen may have to open fire on area targets up to that range.
Back to the movement of early Native Americans into the New World. I brought up the Atlati and the Bow to show that the Bow to be made had to have a more advance society then the Atlati. THe bow is the product of the Neolithic age, but it is NOT what separates the Neolithic from the Paleolithic. The bow needs a sophisticated society working together to get the parts needed for the bow to be made and such sophisticated society is what separates the Neolithic from the Paleolithic.
This difference is important for it appears the early Native Americans were already early Neolithic when they entered North America. It appears that the people of Europe in 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, where still Old Stone Age (Paleolithic). Thus if any of these early Europeans traveled over the ice and ended up in North America they may have had a better spear point then the people coming from Asia, but everything else about them were much more primitive. That meant smaller over all population and over all less technology and thus goods to trade.
Thus it appears that IF people came from Europe to North America, they were the people with inferior technology to the Ancestor's of today's Native American, except for the Clovis Point (if the Clovis point is from Europe not Asia). The larger population from Asia would have easily taken in the small number of people from Europe so that the genes would be minor part of the subsequent gene pool. On the other hand the Clovis point was such an advancement in spear point technology that it would have spread like wild fire among the early Native Americans.
Now, back to the Mormons and modern Native American dispute. The Radicals among the Mormon's do not like what this evidence shows, and try to convert it to barbarian Native Americans replacing advance Whites, while Radicals among the Native Americans dislike the idea that they ancestors came from anywhere by Asia (More to reject the Mormon's claim that the Native American stool North America from White and thus the subsequent white conquest from the Native American was justice of a rightful owner getting his land back. Please note this is NOT my position but I have to mention what the dispute is to show why it is being disputed.
Thus some of this discovery is affected by the above dispute between the Mormons and Native Americans for it shows that people were NOT as divided 24,000 years ago as we some times try to make them out to be. It also can show that the Clovis Point, if decedent from European Design, but have come WITH the Native Americans to North America.
I still lean to this being a Native American improvement over an earlier European design that was introduced by people walking from Europe on the edge of the Atlantic ice Sheet. After 8000 that ice sheet retreated to far north to be used by anyone without advance Neolithic technology (i,e, the Inuit) but primitive people could have functioned quite well on the melting ice cap and its longer periods of daylight when it reached to New England AND England. Once the Ice Cap retreated in 8000 BC, such trips were no longer possible. The distance between land masses were to far to walk during a summer (And I do not see people walking on that ice in the Winter). Thus I see groups no larger then 50 (and most such groups no larger then about a dozen people) moving at any one time. When they reached North America they stayed for it was much better then on the Ice Sheet, but they were much more primitive then the onrushing ancestors of today's Native America and thus were wither wiped out or absorbed.
Just a comment that movement across the Atlantic may have been done but by very small groups.
Side note: Now if you understand the Gulf Stream and the ocean Currents, while you can cut out most European movement to North America prior to the Irish movement in the Dark Ages, you can NOT say the same about North America's Native Americans. I always give the sailing time during the American Revolution, Six weeks from Europe to North America, one week or less from North America to Europe. The reason? The winds and currents flow West to East, thus it is a quick trip to Europe from North America, it is a LONG trip to go from Europe to North America in the days of sails. In fact it was faster to go from England to Africa to North America, the to go straight across the Atlantic to North America. The reason? the Currents and winds for that is how the Currents and Winds go. Thus it is a very long trip from Europe to North America and until the Irish and the later Vikings just not worth it.
Unless you disregard everything that is known about planetary geology, paleontology and archaeology.
For example, a meteorite impact strong enough to move continents would wipe out all life on the planet bigger than a microbe. The one that killed the dinosaurs "only" left a crater 100 miles wide in the Gulf of Mexico.
And if you disregard all the science, you're on the same playing field as the creationists who say the world is 6000 years old and the Grand Canyon was carved by the Great Flood. 
Mal'ta is well known as the easternmost extension of the cultural tradition which produced the "Venuses" of Ice Age Europe -- so it seems odd for the article to say that "people from Europe had reached farther east across Eurasia than previously supposed."
And on the second point, the DNA of the first wave of Native American migrants is dominated in the male lineage by the Q haplotype of the Y-chromosome, which is closely related to European haplotypes and is also still found in Central Asia, and in the female lineage by several mitochondrial types that are more closely associated with East Asia.
It's impressive that both connections show up so clearly in this one child, but neither is surprising.
... I would have guessed female except for the illusion of an erect penis carved in. 
TYY
They can be a little shocking at first, but you get used to the artistic conventions after a while. See both #2 and to a lesser extent #4 (the well-known Venus of Willendorf) below. The Mal'ta figure is not as voluptuous, but it clearly employs the same symbolic vocabulary of fertility and birth.
...I thought the scratch marks indicating breasts were skinny stick figure arms. (Hands clasped.) 
TYY
I never heard of this before -- but it seems plausible. The Siberian glaciers damned the rivers that now flow into the Arctic Ocean, creating huge glacial lakes that could only drain to the west. The resulting network of lakes and rivers flowing across open tundra would have been very conducive to the spread of Ice Age mammoth hunters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Siberian_Glacial_Lake
It is theorized that while drainage to the Arctic Ocean basin (e.g. by the Ob and Yenisei Rivers) was prevented, the lake would eventually overflow to the Mediterranean Sea through a circuitous route that would include the Aral Sea, the Caspian Sea, and the Black Sea. This would have resulted in water from the Selenga River and Lake Baikal draining over a course of some 6,000 miles (9600 km), considerably longer than any river's course today.
Lake Baikal is the comma-shaped blob just above the red outline of present-day Mongolia.
They have to share their poison, it seems, because it's too much for one person to hold.
I think the OP was WAY interesting! 
I don't think that interest in the one denies concern for the other... at least for average to above-average minds.
It's obvious, too?
Because there are quite a few DUers who enjoy reading about scientific discoveries into the ancient history of the human race. 
"his genes suggest he would have had brown hair, brown eyes and freckled skin" outside of red hair
and blue eyes it is a perfect match.
