Possible Ramifications Of Finding A Skeleton?

[Guest]

"Sue" had nothing to do with NAGPRA.

Not directly, but she DID have something to do with Federal agencies jumping the gun and ginning up a situation to do what they wanted to do to the detriment of others.

What shenanigans are you talking about?

Preemptively seizing scientific specimens before the proper chain of procedure was followed, destroying an important archaeological site before it could be properly documented, just for starters.

And all of it because the NAs didn't like the implications of Kennewick Man being caucasoid rather than NA.

You mean the COE jumping the gun on a new law they didn't understand? Yeah, that happens, but it's not a new law anymore and most agencies have experts that deal solely with the issue. And besides, that is what the courts are for - they fix misinterpretations.

And by the time that was all done, the site had long since been destroyed and the remains vanished.

I have little hope that Fish and Wildlife will be any easier to work with if/when a BF skeleton or corpse is found.

[Guest]

So being much of the law IS based on their religious beliefs, an NA's interpretation of 'Ancestor' may very well mean something entirely different as in elder brother, then government experts may view them to be. This is partly what will be tested, because the spirit of the law may well favor their views in this sense.

Clearly this bigfoot mystery is not something that tribes speak completely openly about. Not even archeologists get to hear all the secrets. If remains were found, I'm guessing their protective nature will surface openly and rapidly and be unilateral. A sleeping giant would come to life if you will.

I would not be surprised. We bend over backwards for NAs in a manner we don't do for any other aggrieved minority group.

[Guest]

I would not be surprised. We bend over backwards for NAs in a manner we don't do for any other aggrieved minority group.

Except their position is not as a minority group, its as the original inhabitants of this continent.

[Incorrigible1]

Except their position is not as a minority group, its as the original inhabitants of this continent.

Are they?

[Guest]

As far as these laws are concerned, yeah.

[Incorrigible1]

Sad, that. The Kennewick Man had so much to possibly tell us. I'd like to hear more of what he might provide us. An opportunity lost, perhaps for all time.

These opportunities don't grow on trees.

[Guest]

Dangit! Lost my post again. Sucks!

In short, I agree with you in that respect.

[Guest]

Except their position is not as a minority group, its as the original inhabitants of this continent.

Which means nothing in the modern context, even if true. The NAs are the ONLY minority (and they ARE a minority population) who have en bulk refused to assimilate into the common American culture in whole or in part.

My great great great grandparents were born here. So was I. I am as much a NA as any tribal person. The "who was here first" argument is a game of devolution to the past that does nothing but cause hard feelings.

It is ironic that people who didn't even HAVE a concept of "this is my land" until they met relatively modern Europeans now spend considerable time and energy defending their "claim" to the land.

Are they?

The modern NA is the product of two distinct migratory groups. A group from Asia and a group from Southern Europe both of whom came to opposite shores of North America duing the time of the last Ice Age. The group from Europe was called the Solutreans, and physical evidence of their presence takes the form of both distinctive spear points virtually identical to those used in southern Europe at that time AND the presence of genetic markers in a relatively large portion of the NA population that links them also to southern Europeans.

The two populations later met and merged to become what is now referred to as the Native Americans/First People/etc.

But that is a side issue really. The main point is that gov't agencies cater to powerful and vocal constituencies on a routine basis, and it wouldn't surprise me if somehow they got mixed up in the squabble over found BF remains.

[Guest]

Which means nothing in the modern context, even if true. The NAs are the ONLY minority (and they ARE a minority population) who have en bulk refused to assimilate into the common American culture in whole or in part.

No Mulder, they are preserving their culture so that it is not lost.

My great great great grandparents were born here. So was I. I am as much a NA as any tribal person. The "who was here first" argument is a game of devolution to the past that does nothing but cause hard feelings.

Only to those who feel they need to own the earth. We all turn to dust when we die. Ownership of land goes away the first time the earth decides to burp. Where will your land be if Yellowstone goes up? We'll all be migrating into Mexico and South America.

It is ironic that people who didn't even HAVE a concept of "this is my land" until they met relatively modern Europeans now spend considerable time and energy defending their "claim" to the land.

I can't believe that someone could turn NA's position of honoring the land and mother earth, into a lack of concept of "this is my land". How messed up is that? They only had to claim their land when whites began exploiting and taking everything NA's revered. You've got a pretty skewed view of culture.

The modern NA is the product of two distinct migratory groups. A group from Asia and a group from Southern Europe both of whom came to opposite shores of North America duing the time of the last Ice Age. The group from Europe was called the Solutreans, and physical evidence of their presence takes the form of both distinctive spear points virtually identical to those used in southern Europe at that time AND the presence of genetic markers in a relatively large portion of the NA population that links them also to southern Europeans.

The two populations later met and merged to become what is now referred to as the Native Americans/First People/etc.

That's a theory Mulder, just like evolution is a theory. For example, if Polar Shift actually happens on occasion, there are likely cycles where evidenced populations exist that we merely find thin string-ties to create our shallow migration theories.

But that is a side issue really. The main point is that gov't agencies cater to powerful and vocal constituencies on a routine basis, and it wouldn't surprise me if somehow they got mixed up in the squabble over found BF remains.

Obviously some people don't like that Native People's claim of being here first, that is a sad testimony to the homogenized exploitive society we have become.

[Guest]

Obviously some people don't like that Native People's claim of being here first, that is a sad testimony to the homogenized exploitive society we have become.

Continuing the OT for the moment:

1) Whether the NAs, you , I or anyone else likes it or not, Caucasian people have been on this continent for at least as long if not longer than the Asian originated people that traditionally have been held to be the ancestors of the "modern" NA population (modern being a relative term).

That is neither good NOR bad, it simply is. It is fact: scientific, demonstrable fact. The genetic marker evidence and spear point evidence is conclusive.

2) We treat no other minority population as well legally as we do N Americans. No other minority population is regarded as a legal, sovereign power, or given enclaves of territory that effectively are another nation entirely. You don't see "reservations" for Hispanic people, or African-American people do you? Is there a Spanish-American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or an African-American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, for example?

No. But somehow we have convinced ourselves/been convinced that this one group is special, based on a claim of "being here 'first'"--a claim that we now know is scientifically rebutted, and was (and is) functionally irrelevant in any case.

3) Please do not presume to tell me what I "don't like". I have a small percentage of N American blood myself (not enough to enroll, but it is there), and at least one member of my extended family (by marriage) is N American. I've met him and his family, and get along with them just fine.

[Guest]

You can look at a Sasquatch head and tell the skull won't even remotely resemble a human's, unlike that other skull found which was a version of human. Since they have Sasquatch in their legends I don't see how they could claim him as an ancestor since they referred to them as stick indians, in other words they recognized sasquatch as other-human.

Jodie, So "stick" humans is how they refer to BF? As large a creature as BF is,covered with hair, and huge to boot, I wonder why they would call them stick Indians?

Do NA's think BF is a type of humanoid creature?

[Guest]

PragmaticTheorist said:

Only to those who feel they need to own the earth. We all turn to dust when we die. Ownership of land goes away the first time the earth decides to burp. Where will your land be if Yellowstone goes up? We'll all be migrating into Mexico and South America

Susi says:

If the Yellowstone volcano explodes, I'm not sure that migrating would do any good. From what I have read, and heard, if Yellowstone explodes, we are all goners, as in total world destruction eventually.

[Guest]

Mulder said:

But that is a side issue really. The main point is that gov't agencies cater to powerful and vocal constituencies on a routine basis, and it wouldn't surprise me if somehow they got mixed up in the squabble over found BF remains.

Susi says:

My father always said that if museums would just really understand what they have stored in their basements, such as the London Museum, and the Smithsonian, they would realize that they have the BF species in storage.

My dad believed in BF.

Since my dad was in Academia, I believe him..

[Guest]

That's a theory Mulder, just like evolution is a theory. For example, if Polar Shift actually happens on occasion, there are likely cycles where evidenced populations exist that we merely find thin string-ties to create our shallow migration theories.[/color]

Further, going back to one of your points:

The presence of the genetic markers is not "theory". The markers are THERE. That is physical fact. The spear points are THERE. That is also physical fact.

Edited March 22, 2011 by masterbarber
removed content that should have been pm'd to a staff member

[Guest]

Mulder said:

Which means nothing in the modern context, even if true. The NAs are the ONLY minority (and they ARE a minority population) who have en bulk refused to assimilate into the common American culture in whole or in part.

My great great great grandparents were born here. So was I. I am as much a NA as any tribal person. The "who was here first" argument is a game of devolution to the past that does nothing but cause hard feelings.

It is ironic that people who didn't even HAVE a concept of "this is my land" until they met relatively modern Europeans now spend considerable time and energy defending their "claim" to the land.

Susi says:

I would like to mention that from my experiences with NAs, all I have seen is a culture that has not really moved into this century. They may have TVs, and drive cars, but they live so poorly, and do stick to many of the old ways. I've seen them carrying their babies on their backs in original papooses, the mother's dirty haired, poorly dressed, it just broke my heart to see them walking into town looking like that. We have only kept them dependent on the government. I wonder if we stopped supporting them if they might not do better?

I feel sorry for them, they seem so trapped in misery. I have never seen one of them smile.