• Darrin Lowery found a collection of tools in Maryland that may date to 22,000 years ago.
• That would mean humans first arrived in North America thousands of years before we thought.
• Most experts believe humans first arrived in North America between 15,000 and 20,000 years ago.

North and South America were the last inhabited continents that modern humans settled thousands of years ago, but when and how they reached the Americas remains a mystery.

"We don't know who these first peoples were," Todd Braje, executive director of the University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History, told Business Insider. We don't know "where they came from, when they arrived, the technologies that they had available," he added.

For many years, archaeologists thought the first humans to set foot in the Americas did so around 13,000 years ago. But more recently, new findings have challenged that theory, pushing the timeline back even further.

Now, a recent series of discoveries on Parsons Island, Maryland, could wind back the clock yet again. And it raises some difficult questions about early human migration across North America.

Outside the mainstream

Darrin Lowery has been hunting for artifacts on Maryland islands around the Chesapeake Bay since he was 9 years old. Over 40 years later, he's amassed a large collection of tools that he believes some of the earliest Americans used.

He found nearly 300 tools on Parsons Island and says they're around 22,000 years old. That's thousands of years before many scientists think humans first journeyed to North America.

If Lowery's hypothesis is correct, it would significantly change our ideas of how and when people started arriving in this part of the world.

However, Lowery, who mainly works as an independent geologist, hasn't published his latest work in a peer-reviewed journal, making other experts skeptical of a theory that's already a bit outside the mainstream.

Lowery doesn't mind the criticism, though. "If I'm wrong, I'm fine with that," he told Business Insider. "Prove me wrong."

When did the first modern humans reach North America?

Around 13,000 years ago something significant was happening across northern North America: The glaciers that had covered part of the continent for millennia were melting.

Archaeologists thought humans needed to wait for those glaciers to melt to migrate across this region. Otherwise, the journey through what is now Canada would have been too dangerous, with little food available along the way.

So, for most of the 20th century, the theory was that the first Americans came from Asia around 13,000 years ago, crossing the now-submerged Bering land bridge that connected Siberia and present-day Alaska. Then those humans and their ancestors made their way across the areas of the Americas with fewer glaciers.

But by the second half of the 20th century, older sites were turning up, like a 14,500-year-old site in Chile, Monte Verde. If people were that far south at the time, it meant humans had to have traveled from North America to South America well before 13,000 years ago.

"It really changed everything about what we understood about when and how people arrived to the Americas," Braje said of the Chile site. One alternative theory is that people followed the less icy Pacific Coast and then started moving east.

While individual sites are often subjects of debate, the widely accepted range of humans' first arrival in the Americas is now between 20,000 to 15,000 years ago, Braje said.

But Lowery said his artifacts are even older.

Dating 22,000-year-old artifacts

Over the course of 93 visits to Parsons Island, Lowery and other volunteers found a mix of chipped-off rock flakes, a stone for hammering, and knives.

Due to erosion, most of the artifacts fell out of the embankment that once held them.

However, nine were still stuck in the bank, and three of those dated to around 22,000 years ago.

Dating ancient artifacts like this is tricky and is often the source of contention around these sites that question our understanding and timeline of ancient human history.

For instance, most dating methods require organic material and won't work on stone tools. Instead, scientists test charcoal, pollen, and other matter found near stone artifacts.

However, if a tool shifts from its original position — like if it falls out of the embankment that's holding it — it's difficult to date it reliably.

That's why only a handful of Lowery's artifacts could be tested.

Though Lowery doesn't want to publish a paper through peer review — a process he called "antiquated" — he said he did his due diligence in dating the artifacts.

He used different methods to date the still-in-place artifacts and also sent samples to independent labs for verification.

Using radiocarbon dating that measured the amount of carbon in flakes of charcoal, an independent lab estimated the artifacts' ages to be between 20,563 and 22,656 years old.

If these artifacts are as old as the lab analysis suggests, then Lowery's discovery could rewrite our understanding of ancient American human history.

The journey from Alaska to Maryland

Around 21,000 years ago, nearly all of Canada was covered in glaciers. Therefore, one of the biggest questions with Lowery's theory is how humans could have made the trek from Alaska to Maryland 22,000 years ago when there was a vast, icy landscape in between.

But Lowery said nearly 26,000 years ago, Beringian wolves traveled through a temporary corridor between ice sheets. Humans could have used the same route, he said.

"I think this is largely a misconception that ice is an impediment," Lowery said. "It's a challenge, but humans are pretty damn smart."

Lowery admitted this is just what he called "a story," but it's one some experts refuse to entertain. One archaeologist that The Washington Post spoke with refused to comment on the non-peer-reviewed paper.

For Braje, Lowery's research is reminiscent of past debates when new discoveries pushed back the timeline for the first American arrivals.

Braje didn't dismiss Lowery's ideas outright, but he thinks they need to go through the peer-review process. "I think all these ideas are valid ones that we should be talking about," he said, "but then we have to go to the scientific evidence."

"To make big claims like this takes a lot of work, a lot of evidence, a lot of enduring critique, but that's part of the scientific process," Braje said.

• Fisker announced another round of layoffs during an all-hands meeting Wednesday morning.
• CEO Henrik Fisker said he wasn't directly involved in the decision, sources told BI.
• Fisker recently appointed a chief restructuring officer who was given sole authority over some of the company's financial decision-making.

Henrik Fisker had grim news for his staff when they logged on to a short all-hands meeting Wednesday morning. The electric carmaker was implementing yet another round of layoffs, he said.

Four employees who attended the meeting told Business Insider that the CEO and founder attempted to shift responsibility for the latest staff cuts, frustrating some staff who felt he was failing to take accountability for how the company had gotten to the brink of bankruptcy.

Henrik Fisker told employees he had not been directly involved in the decision to cut staff and instead said the choice to further reduce the company's workforce was made by chief restructuring officer John DiDonato, two employees who attended told BI.

DiDonato, the restructuring officer, is the managing director of Huron Consulting Group and was brought in to help Fisker in April. Fisker was required to install a chief restructuring officer last month after the company missed an interest payment to an unnamed institutional investor and noteholder. The agreement gave the CRO, who reports directly to the company's recently established transaction committee, "sole authority" over decision-making related to a potential sale of the company and "oversight of cash management," according to an April 16 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

"The general gist of the meeting was Henrik was saying 'These are not my layoffs,'" said one worker, who witnessed the meeting and later found out that their role had been eliminated.

Shortly after the meeting, dozens of workers found out they'd been impacted by the cut when they lost access to the company's internal systems, two workers who lost their jobs as part of the cuts told BI. The employees later received an email from human resources notifying them they'd been impacted by the cuts, they said.

At least one Fisker employee took to the company's internal Microsoft Teams channel to criticize Henrik Fisker's comments.

"You have not one time taken responsibility for what's going on at Fisker," the employee wrote in the Teams chat. "I am here for 8 months and not once did you acknowledge mistakes by our leadership. It's always others."

Another employee wrote: "We love you Henrick!!!!! Keep fighting!"

The recent layoffs represent the latest in a series of cuts at Fisker, including a round last week.

The significant staff reductions are designed to eventually bring the workforce down to a group of about 100 employees, one former Fisker employee with knowledge of the issue said.

It's not clear how many employees remain. Spokespeople for Fisker and its CRO DiDonato did not immediately respond to requests for comment ahead of publication.

Fisker has repeatedly warned over the past few months that the company may go out of business within the year. On April 29, the company sent notices to staffers, in compliance with the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, that they may be laid off in two months if the company can't find a buyer or additional funding.

Do you work for Fisker or have a tip? Reach out to the reporter via a non-work email at gkay@insider.com

• Justice Samuel Alito is rejecting calls for his recusal from January 6-related cases.
• Alito blamed his wife for flying two controversial flags that have ties to right-wing movements. 
• But Alito's explanation for why and when his wife flew one of the flags isn't adding up. 

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito is doubling down on blaming his wife for flying two flags that are associated with right-wing groups and ideas over the couple's homes in recent years.

In a Wednesday letter to House and Senate Democrats, Alito rejected lawmakers' calls for him to recuse himself from two high-profile cases involving former President Donald Trump and January 6 rioters, saying he had nothing to do with the partisan flags flying over his properties.

"My wife is fond of flying flags," Alito wrote. "I am not."

But Alito's efforts to address the flag fiasco have left more questions than answers, all the while sparking another neutrality crisis for a high court already wracked by conflict of interest allegations.

Neighborly dispute

What began as a dispute over an anti-Trump sign in Alito's Virginia neighborhood back in 2021 has exploded into a national news story after The New York Times reported this month that an upside-down American flag was flown outside the justice's house soon after the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

Upside-down American flags have been used as a symbol to protest slavery and the Vietnam War, but the practice has more recently been adopted by proponents of the "Stop the Steal" campaign, which erroneously claims Trump won the 2020 presidential election.

Alito has repeatedly denied any part in flying the flag above his home, telling The Times earlier this month that his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, raised the flag in response to an ongoing fight with two residents in the neighborhood.

In his Wednesday letter, Alito said his wife was involved in "nasty" fight with two neighbors, adding that she only raised the flag after a male neighbor "berated her" using "foul language, including what I regard as the vilest epithet that can be addressed to a woman."

But Emily Baden, one of the neighbors involved in the dispute, told The Times this week that it was she — not her then-boyfriend — who used the curse word, saying the verbal altercation took place weeks after the flag was flown outside Alito's home. The outlet obtained a text message and police call that backed up Baden's timeline, calling into question Alito's version of events.

The Supreme Court did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Alito said he asked his wife to take the flag down "as soon as I saw it," but for "several days," she refused. 

"My wife and I own our Virginia home jointly. She, therefore, has the legal right to use the property as she sees fit, and there were no additional steps that I could have taken to have the flag taken down more promptly," he wrote. 

Martha-Ann Alito appeared to have at least some awareness of the upside-down flag's meaning in 2021, telling a Washington Post reporter at the time that the flag was "an international signal of distress" and suggesting its presence at her home was in response to the neighborhood dispute.

A second flag

Alito's explanation for why his wife raised the upside-down flag in January 2021 also doesn't account for the second controversial flag now tied to the couple.

The Times reported this month that an "Appeal to Heaven" flag was flown outside Alito's New Jersey beach house as recently as last summer. The flag also has ties to January 6, 2021, rioters and proponents of a more Christian government.

Alito said he was not familiar with the "Appeal to Heaven" flag when his wife flew it, writing that he assumed it was expressing a religious and patriotic message. He said neither he nor his wife were aware the flag had any association with the "Stop the Steal" movement. 

"She did not fly it to associate herself with that or any other group, and the use of an old historic flag by a new group does not necessarily drain that flag of all other meanings," Alito wrote. 

In his letter to Democrats, Alito says he is "confident" that his explanations are sufficient cause for rejecting calls for his recusal.

However, the Supreme Court's own code of conduct states justices shouldn't give the appearance of any political opinion or bias with regard to issues that could appear before the court. Alito and his colleagues will soon rule on two major cases related to the January 6, 2021, rioters and Trump in outcomes that could have an influence on the upcoming 2024 presidential election.

A legal ethics professor told BI earlier this month that the flags would have almost certainly disqualified Alito from such cases if he were on a lower court, but the Supreme Court's code of conduct is "merely performative."

• Bank of America analysts predict AI will create a new class of devices called 'IntelliPhones.'
• AI enhancements could make phones more context-aware and proactive.
• There's a new battle brewing over who will create the most useful AI-powered phone. 

The first cellphone came out in the early 1980s. It was connected to a cellular radio system and didn't require a physical connection to a network.

Then, we had feature phones. These connected to the internet and could store and play music.

Apple ushered in the smartphone era, with location data, fancy cameras, and the all-important App Store.

Is AI about to launch a new chapter? Analysts at Bank of America Securities think so. And they've come up with a new name for this future device.

The "IntelliPhone."

Yes, it's an awful name. Too many syllables. No one is ever going to say, "Ugh, I can't find my IntelliPhone. Have you seen it?"

However, artificial intelligence models, chatbots, and other AI-powered applications could get so useful that our current smartphones might look kinda dumb in the future.

Maybe no one will have to ask where their IntelliPhone is, because it will somehow find itself.

"Context awareness will be the key differentiator," Wamsi Mohan, an analyst at Bank of America Securities, wrote in a research note on Wednesday that listed a number of future capabilities that may take these gadgets way beyond current handsets.

Hype warning

A word of caution here. The AI hype cycle is in overdrive right now, and Mohan and his colleagues were writing a research note about Apple ahead of its WWDC conference next month.

The company is expected to unveil a slew of new AI features for iPhones at this event. It's common for Wall Street analysts to issue positive research and "buy" recommendations in instances like this.

The mother of all upgrade cycles

Still, Mohan makes some compelling arguments. If AI tools on phones can really set them apart from current devices, consumers have a new reason to buy a fresh handset.

"We see the introduction of AI smartphones (IntelliPhones) as a once in a decade upgrade event," Mohan wrote.

At Google's I/O conference earlier this month, the internet giant showed off several new AI capabilities for Pixel, Samsung, and other Android phones.

"It's a once-in-a-generation moment to reinvent what phones can do," Android chief Sameer Samat told Business Insider. "We are going to seize that moment."

Consumers will only embrace these new devices if they're actually useful in everyday situations. Google has already shown off some of these new killer applications for AI. Apple will have to show off more of these powerful use cases at WWDC if it's going to keep up.

Mohan at BofA describes a wide range of new capabilities that could set IntelliPhones apart from smartphones and fire up the mother of all upgrade cycles.

"We view the upcoming AI enabled phones (IntelliPhones) to drive a multi-year upgrade cycle similar to the step function improvement driven by the introduction of smartphones," he wrote, calling this a "once in a decade type of event."

IntelliPhone capabilities

Here are some of the potential capabilities of IntelliPhones, according to BofA:

Context aware assistance: AI-enabled phones will offer more advanced personal assistants that understand context better and provide more relevant and timely responses.

Proactive suggestions: These assistants could proactively suggest actions based on user patterns.

Object and scene recognition: These phones can identify objects, people, and scenes in photos and suggest actions like sharing, searching for more information, or buying related products.

Real-time translation: AI-capable phones offer real-time language translation making communication easier while traveling or interacting with people who speak different languages.

Predictive health alerts: AI could predict potential health issues by analyzing patterns in collected data and alert users to seek medical advice if needed.

AI driven content creation: Users may be able to create more immersive and engaging AR/VR content with the help of AI tools on phones that simplify the creation process and enhance the final output.

Music Haptics: AI could refine vibrations from music to improve the experience for phone users who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Vocal Shortcuts: AI could recognize speech patterns and improve speech recognition for users with conditions that affect speech such as cerebral palsy, or those who have suffered a stroke. Users could also assign custom utterances that Siri can understand to launch shortcuts and complete complex tasks.

• Telsa faces investor pushback on reinstating Elon Musk's $55 billion pay package.
• The largest public pension fund in the US currently plans to vote against the pay plan.
• Musk called out the pension fund for "breaking their word."

Tesla is facing increasing pushback from investors regarding its bid to reinstate Elon Musk's $55 billion pay package.

On Wednesday, there was yet another sign that Tesla might be facing an uphill battle when the CEO of the California Public Employees' Retirement System, Marcie Frost, told CNBC the fund plans to vote against the proposal to reinstate Musk's pay plan, pending any future conversations with Tesla.

"We do not believe that the compensation is commensurate with the performance of the company," Frost said.

CalPERS is the largest public pension fund in the US and is among one of Tesla's 30 largest investors with about 9.5 million shares, according to Bloomberg. The fund initially voted for Musk's pay package when it was taken to a shareholder vote in 2018.

Musk does not receive a salary from Tesla and his pay package is centered on a series of goalposts around the carmaker's financial growth. The plan, which was valued at $55 billion by Bloomberg when it was struck down by a Delaware judge in January, involves a 10-year grant of 12 tranches of stock options that are vested when Tesla hits specific targets. When the company hits each milestone, Musk gets stock equal to 1% of outstanding shares at the time of the grant. Tesla said it hit all of the 12 targets as of 2023.

Musk quickly posted on social media to criticize CalPERS's stance on the proposal on Wednesday.

"What she's saying makes no sense, as all the contractual milestones were met. CalPERS is breaking their word," Musk wrote on X.

CalPERS is joining a growing list of investment funds that are publicly expressing their desire to vote against Tesla's compensation plan for Musk. On May 21, a group of shareholders filed a letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission calling for investors to vote against both Musk's pay package and the proposal to reelect James Murdoch and Kimbal Musk. Separately, proxy advisory firm Glass Lewis said in a report on Saturday that the pay plan was "excessive" and presented investors with "uncertain benefits and additional risk."

Meanwhile, Tesla has been pulling out all the stops to promote the proposal. On Wednesday, the company began offering investors the opportunity to tour the Texas gigafactory alongside Musk in exchange for proof they'd voted in Tesla's annual meeting. Tesla has also argued the compensation plan is "critical to the future success of Tesla" and has even paid for a handful of advertisements promoting the pay plan.

The annual meeting for investors will take place on June 13. Shareholders will be asked to vote on several proposals in addition to the proposal to reinstate Musk's pay package, which was struck down by a Delaware judge earlier this year. The company is also asking investors to vote on a proposal to move Tesla's state of incorporation from Delaware to Texas and a separate proposal to reelect Tesla board members Kimbal Musk and Murdoch.

A spokesperson for Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Are you a Tesla investor, do you work for the company, or have a tip? Reach out to the reporter via a non-work email and device at gkay@businessinsider.com or 248-894-6012