I've met a number of highly-paid, arrogant pricks over the years. Most of the younger ones seem to have a far better attitude.
I agree that human history should be taught in public schools. My fascination with "local history" began before the 1st grade, when I listened to my best friend's grandfather, the neighbor Elder. But it got kicked into a higher gear in 2nd grade, when the principal told my class a story about Mohawk Leader Joseph Brant.
I worked with Onondaga on the national graves protection & reinterment act. Some of the professionals resented that. I presented a paper on a site at the largest archaeological society meeting year's ago. A few of the pro ranks were not too happy by an amateur being invited to speak. Most ignored me. But I made friends with some, which resulted in Chief Waterman & I speaking at regional colleges and universities.
When I was in college 50+ years ago, we were taught three theories: Native Americans got here 12,000 years ago, along with 20,000 and 40,000. A pro from Hartwick College in Oneonta, NY claimed he found "proof" of flint-knapping dating 73,000 years bc. He was way off, though, as the knapping had been done by the Wisconsin glacier. But today, the school has very progressive staff.
Those foot prints are fascinating. I've read articles and watched shows that support and oppose that early date. I think it is important to keep an open mind ..... including recognizing that North America ain't the only America. I tend to think others reached South America before the glacier's melt opened up a path through the artic. That could include small groups traveling by ocean, that may or may not have been successful in maintaining life here for centuries.
= new reply since forum marked as read