Imagine that archaeologists found one of the following new pieces of evidence. which one suggests that the theory that early humans came to the americas from the siberian region is not true? archaeologists discovered signs of green landscapes and bodies of water in the regions where the early humans from siberia first landed. archaeologists discovered the presence of animals such as deer and rabbits before the arrival of early humans from siberia. archaeologists discovered barren land and infertile soil in the americas before the arrival of early humans from siberia. archaeologists discovered evidence of travel between asia and the americas before the arrival of early humans from siberia.

Having discovered signs of green landscapes and bodies of water is a useless evidence. It could have been there since the beginning of time. Those landscapes could be a natural landform. Therefore, this evidence would just to point to no one has ever inhabited Americas at this moment of time.

Deer and rabbits are present in Siberia, therefore, this would just point to this region evidently.

Barren lands and infertile soil would mean no one had ever settled in this place. If there was, it wouldn’t have been barren and infertile. 

frederick the great and the war of austrian succession. frederick william of brandenburg-prussia trained his son, frederick, to be a hardy soldier. he also declared himself king of bohemia, and maria theresa sent troops to retake bohemia. in august he led 80,000 of these men across the frontier into bohemia, his

b or c im pretty sure