If It's True Will I Get Reparations?

UPDATE: I forgot to throw a hat tip out to Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit for the link.

An archaeologist at the Smithsonian Instition are championing a "radical" theory about the history of North America. Namely, that the long-held view (the "settled science" if you will) that the continent was first settled by travelers taking advantage of an ice bridge from Siberia about 15,000 years ago is wrong. As it turns out, about 40 years ago some fishermen found a mammoth tusk in Chesapeake Bay that had a blade stuck in it. The tusk was a bit older than 15,000 years.

But the mastodon relic found near the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay turned out to be 22,000 years old, suggesting that the blade was just as ancient.

Whoever fashioned that blade was not supposed to be here.

Other relics have been found in the mid-Atlantic region, all found in soil that dates back to over 20,000 years ago.

There are problems with the theory, as even the author points out. Mainly that the dating is of the media in which the artifacts were found (the tusk, the soil) rather than of the artifacts themselves.

“It’s an indirect date,” Dillehay said. “You need a feature like a hearth or something that’s clearly human. But it’s still suggestive.”

It's still way too early to tell if the long-held view of the settling of North America is in any real danger. But wouldn't it be funny if one day the conventional theory is that Europeans had settled North America first and were driven out by (what later came to be known as) Indians?