When we look at physical evidence, an explanation for the evidence must be true. There must be at least one explanation, but it is possible to have more than one. "God did it" is not an explanation of anything but a misdirection. Lack of evidence is not proof of "no act" but it is an indication. After a bunch of no evidence, it is time to start looking elsewhere for a explanation.
So there was a opening between the ice shears 13000 years ago, and the buffalo started to move through the north south corridor again. The corridor was blocked for 1500 years, so man could have walked to North America before the corridor closed before 14500 years ago. Oh well, the bison certainly did, and the Clovis likely followed the buffalo much of the year. (Clovis, New Mexico as the first place evidence was found) So our natives got here the old fashioned way, they walked, possible following a buffalo herd. Faith that that the world would supply what they needed to survive would have stopped them; they need to keep searching for food to keep up to the heard. The crows and ravens led them, a raven can find a dead thing from considerable distance.
The lack of evidence for the existence of god is enough reason to stop even considering the existence, and along with that goes much of what religion is promoting. A soul, aka a life after death, is real poppy cock although it is appealing. Impermanence is one of the foundations of Buddhism, and yet they promote rebirth and karma onto the future rebirths. He said it was not the same, but never explained it. He also said that we each need to make peace with that and the gods, and yet so much of his teachings are obviously true in many forms. If it can be demonstrated but not proven, then it is better than no evidence. Oh well, some things that can be "demonstrated" are not what we think they are but illusions and delusions.
After the inability to develop evidence to prove a concept, science usually moves on. If some contrary evidence is found, often the disproof of a pet theory is just shrugged of with a duh type realization. Of course, it is obvious. It is like time. It is now defined by what we can measure, not what it likely is. Atomic vibration rate is effected by gravity, but is time in reality? So is the red shift really expansion or a low gravity effect on light vibration frequency?