"...you link haplotypes to assumed cultural differences by rhetoric."
Rhetoric is not involved. Archaeo-genetics maps migrational patterns through time of diverse human groups.
"The paradigm of isolationism is as conscious, ‘evolutionary’, and diffusionist as your migration pradigm."
Although not absolute terms, for the sake of argument isolationism and diffusionism are mutually exclusive. Mainstream archaeology for the most part seems to favor the former.
"I have developed the work of Levi Strauss to isolate about 100 features of the core content of culture, and a model to demonstrate that about 60% of these features are always present, always in the same five layers of structure, in all artworks and building sites."
Structuralism is a methodology that was deconstructed by a bunch of French philosophers many years ago.
"And ironically, you bash modern migrations as if that did not change ancient American cultures."
I do no such thing. If you asked a Lakota on the Pine Ridge Reservation how migrations of the 18th and 19th centuries have effected him or her, that Indian would just sweep his/her hand across the devastation and poverty of the poorest county in America and say... nothing.
"I agree with you that there were several seaborne migrations to the Americas, but the culturally significant ones were relatively recent, thus few mutations to track."
I would point you to the scholarly work on diffusionism in such journals as [www.earlysitesresearchsociety.org] edited by professor emeritus Stephen C. Jett, UC Davis. I helped to edit and format a couple of these issues. Gunnar Thompson's book American Discovery is replete with cross-cultural borrowings. The books of Barry Fell are routinely trashed by tentured professors.
I used quotation marks around "Celtic crosses" to imply that they probably were NOT Celtic but were much older and possibly ancient Egyptian. The Native American "medicine wheel" is the exact copy of the petroglyphs found at Driekops Eiland.