Kennewick Man I am I am... direct decendant? Much ado about the Kennewick man, discovered 9 years ago in the Columbia River. An article in the July Harper's Magazine has an article accusing the scientific community of racism in determining the skeletal origins. Archeologist K Kris Hirst has this to say: " the main thrust of Harper's contributing editor Jack Hitt’s argument is that scientists who are looking for pre-clovis in the Americas are... white supremacists. As proof, he discusses in depth the public discussion over Kennewick Man's supposedly Caucasoid appearance. Hitt argues that the discussion is clear evidence that scientists desperately want to prove that European guys settled the New World before the Native American guys. What Hitt misses (if you’ll pardon the pun) is that the interesting thing about the Kennewick Man (or the Ancient One as his probable descendants refer to him) is that he looks very similar to just about every skeleton of the same age in just about every place in the world. In other words, it may be that 10,000 or 20,000 years ago, there were no major ethnic differences between anyone. Nina Jablonski points out (and Hitt cites her) that skin color changes quickly, and 20,000 years ago or so, all Homo sapiens had little pigmentation. It was only after they had settled in a region that skin color and the other ethnic characteristics that we recognize developed. In other words, 10,000 or 20,000 years ago, humans hadn't settled down yet, and were still roaming around looking for places to live. These folks were not Europeans, Mr. Hitt, they were Homo sapiens ancestors in our original state—-and if you want to get technical, in fact, as mtDNA studies have proven, we are all Africans."