Where there are no hard facts there can be no hard conclusions. It should be stressed that the following conclusions do not reject the notion of early human beings as ‘inquisitive wanderers’. This speculative discussion suggests:

1. (a) Contrary to prevalent understanding, it seems likely that Australia received substantial migrant flows from Timor at a relatively early stage and more persistently than by other routes. Flows via New Guinea may have become more prominent with the development of directional skills in sailing.

2. (b) Though accidents may have occurred, there seem to be few grounds for perceiving Aboriginal migration to be the result of casual accidents.

3. (c) There seem to be several reasons for believing it likely that there were pressures potentially leading to a more or less persistent and rising flow of migration to Australia at least from around 65,000 BP and possibly earlier, even though there may have been some interruptions to this flow.

4. (d) Means to travel by sea from Timor did not depend on very advanced maritime technology.

5. (e) With quite minimal watercraft, lowering sea levels (and hence reduced sea distances) were not as generally dominant an issue in opening opportunities for transfer as has often been suggested; on the other hand, the facility to travel directly from Timor to Australia was determined by comparatively small sea level changes and by the shape of the Australian Shelf.

6. […]