Which Human migration model is more favored?

Take a look at the ocean currents. There are highways and rivers that actually flow right through the ocean. Surely humans would and could have populated south america before north america. But the real answer is probably both.

It would be favored by theorists to have one simple explanation, one source, one people, one genetic lineage that started the population of america and whose movement could be represented on a map by big red arrows. But the people probably came from several sources. SE Asia by boat, north america by way of Siberia, and several places along the pacific coast at least.

It seems to me that a single-starting place 'Out of Africa' with repeated dispersions and some back-migration is presently most favoured concept of human foundation.... No. Out of Africa with low phases of archaic introgression is most of the time the paradigm after a couple of up to date genetics papers supported trace archaic DNA from Denisovians and Neanderthals in latest humans, which matches the observations of archaic qualities turning up in EUP Europeans by way of Trinkhaus and others.. On the second the most bickering is over some VERY historic remains in China that show chins, and so would appear to be AMH's, but are vastly older than the popularly supported 80k exit date from Africa (over 100k). It is looking like the OOA date perhaps extra like 130k or older.