I've read that analysis of the solutrean laurel leaf blade dredged up with the 22,000 year old mammoth bones indicates that it was made from stone in France. If that turns out to be true that's kind of a cincher. I'm not sure why it's so hard to believe that people came to the americas from more than one direction when you consider that stone age man was able to populate every part of the planet. There are human settlement sites in Chile that date 14,000 years ago. In Snowmass Colorado there is some tenuous evidence of human activity 40,000 years ago. There are multiple examples of human settlements in the americas that predate any clovis tools ever found.
One thing that bothers me is that the media hears of the solutrean hypothesis and in their mind that becomes "Europeans Came to America First!" and they run with it. What people don't realize is that twenty thousand years ago Europe had not been invented yet. Once you accept that europe and asia are not two seperate places, then really it just becomes a question of, when stone age man came to america did they only travel in one direction?
And then there's the genetic testing. I don't understand what they think this will prove. For one thing it relies on modern genetic distribution as a basis of comparison, and it's dependent on the presumption that the genes of the caveman being tested survived and were passed on to living populations. And on top of all this, the current thinking is that humans in eurasia didn't begin to diversify genetically untill about 20,000 years ago.
