I first became aware of the macrolanguage families as proposed by Morris Swadesh
But I understand that the more recent constructions such as Dene-Caucasian are rearranged from Swadesh's constructions (his Vasco-Dene group in the current example, which also incorporated the Eurasian languages) And some of the languages such as Sumerian and Elamite are seen as possibly belonging to one group or another. Sumerian language is elsewhere linked to the Basque language and it is important, but it is porobably better to keep it separate from the Nostratic languages although related to them. One thing which is interesting is that Elamite might be related to Dravidian and hence Harrapian (thought to be related to Uralic) and was located near the Sumerian homeland (according to the discussion under the Nostratic languages) while Burushaski is seen as one of the Caucasiatic superfamily possibly related to Sumerian (see under "Bengtson's view" halfway down the page under the Dene-Caucasian discussion on Wikipedia) while Burushaski languages are up in the Northern Indus valley area. In other words it seems that the two areas have swapped colonies in ancient times.
Be all that as it may, there seems good reason to count Basque and Sumerian as separate from the far-Eastern members of the Caucasian-Dene group, and to count that Western division as related to the Megalithic culture. The Dene languages are also known as Athabascan and essentially the theory is that they are a colony of Central-Asiatics colonizing the New World and speaking a language closely related to Chinese.
The proponents of the superfamily would want most particularly that you did not read that as "a Chinese Colony in the New World" although that is close enough to saying the same thing.
However that is not the most interesting part. THIS is the most interesting part:
The last item under the section "History of the Hypothesis" in the Caucasian-Dene Wikipedia entry reads "In 1998, Vitaliy V. Shevoroshkin rejected the Amerind affinity of the Almosan (Algonquian-Wakashan) languages, suggesting instead that they had a relationship with Dené-Caucasian. Several years later, he offered a number of lexical and phonological correspondences between the North Caucasian, the Salishan, and the Wakashan languages, concluding that the latter two might represent a distinct branch of the former and that they must have separated after the break of the Avar-Andi-Tsezian unity in the period about the 2nd-3rd millennia BC.
SHEVOROSHKIN, Vitaly V. (Fall 1998), "1998 Symposium on Nostratic at Cambridge" (JPEG), Mother Tongue (ASLIP) (31): 28–32, http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/MT-31.htm, retrieved 2008-01-28
SHEVOROSHKIN, Vitaliy V., 1991. (Ed.) Dene-Sino-Caucasian Languages. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
SHEVOROSHKIN, Vitaliy V., 2004. "Proto-Salishan and Proto-North-Caucasian Consonants: a few cognate sets." in Nostratic Centennial Conference: the Pécs Papers. ed. by. I. Hegedűs & P. Sidwell, pp. 181–191. Pécs: Lingua Franca Group
SHEVOROSHKIN, Vitaliy V., 2003. "Salishan and North Caucasian." Mother Tongue 8: 39–64."
Which would mean that the Algonkian, Muskohegian and Salish Amerindian language groups of North America originated during the Historical Sumerian Empire out of a language group related to Basque and Sumerian, and settled in Noth America circa 2500to 2000 BC, probably as part of the Megalithic culture and probably by way of the Atlantic Ocean. And as far as MtDNA lineages go, most of them were likely of haplogroups A and B and Blood Group O. Physically they would have been of the type that used to be called Atlanto-Mediterranean or Iberian although possibly even including some Middle-Easterners in the aristocracy or priesthood.
The other side of this coin is in several attempts to relate the Sumerian languages to Malayo-Polynesian which very likely enntails the expansion of Megalithic culture in the other direction. That is a separate matter I mean to take up later on. I had intended to also mention the possibility of the NiloSaharan languages being related to both Sumerian and to Mayan (and other authorities relate it to Nostratic and see Afroasiatic as a direct outgrowth from it) But that shall also call for a different discussion at a different time.
Megalithic Languages Map by Dale D.
Best Wishes, Dale D.