SWWASAS Posted November 5, 2015 BFF Patron Posted November 5, 2015 Part of the problem perhaps with the use of aboriginal with reference to the Americas is that as far as science knows we all migrated here. There are no known ancestor of modern man that originated in the Americas. The term Native American is a misnomer. When I read my genetic history there is a remote but entirely plausible possibility that my ancestors could have reached the Americas before the main stream Native Americans did over the Bearing Sea land bridge during the last ice age. There are several known arrival routes into the Americas other than the Bearing Sea land bridge. Migration from Western Europe, migration by sea from Asia, or from Polynesia by island hopping. If BF originated on this continent then that is a totally unknown to science family tree, since as the skeptics like to point out, there is no fossil or other evidence to suggest it at this point. I think it unlikely that BF developed independent of the development of mankind because of the physical similarities. At some point we had to have had a common ancestor to be so similar. It that happened, then it had to have been in Eurasia or all the way back to African common ancestors of both human and BF strains. But since there have been ice ages every 65,000 years or so going back several million years, BF could have beat and predate mankind to the Americas and been here when the current crop of "Native Americans" arrived during the last ice age. Perhaps that is where the expression, "here goes the neighborhood" comes from.
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 5, 2015 Posted November 5, 2015 The Humans that arrived first were the First Nations People. AKA Native Americans AKA Indians. They established a culture and civilization that stood for centuries until the arrival of Europeans AKA White Men. This makes the Europeans interlopers just as if the reverse had happened. We get hung up on the notion that technology somehow is a direct indication of raw intelligence but it's not it's simply an application of it and frequently an aberrant application of such. A human being of 30,000 years ago could if brought into the present acquire the same knowledge that we possess and take for granted.
SWWASAS Posted November 5, 2015 BFF Patron Posted November 5, 2015 Was the Kennewick Man first Nations by your definition? He did not come from Europe. He is genetically different than First Nations People. If he got here that early how many others came here as early or earlier that are genetically different than what we accept as First Nations People. How early and where did they come from? I have no idea and you certainly don't.
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 5, 2015 Posted November 5, 2015 Was the Kennewick Man first Nations by your definition? He did not come from Europe. He is genetically different than First Nations People. If he got here that early how many others came here as early or earlier that are genetically different than what we accept as First Nations People. How early and where did they come from? I have no idea and you certainly don't. In June 2015, scientists at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark determined through DNA from 8,500-year-old bones that Kennewick Man is in fact related to contemporary Native Americans, including those from the region where his bones were found.[9] The international team of scientists had confirmed this finding to the Army Corps of Engineers as far back as 2013.[9] Chatters, the discoverer of the bones, had long changed his mind after finding similar skull shapes among confirmed ancestors of Native Americans.[9] The results did not surprise scientists who study the genetics of ancient people, as almost all Paleoamericans "have shown strong genetic ties with modern Native Americans".[9] Analysis showed that Kennewick Man is “very closely related to the Colville" tribe in northeast Washington.[10] The results were published inNature magazine.[11] Public officials such as Governor Inslee and Senator Murray have since called on the Corps of Engineers, who retained possession of Kennewick Man, to return the remains to Native American tribes.[12][13]
JDL Posted November 5, 2015 Posted November 5, 2015 I think if you talk to enough scientists, you'll get enough different opinions to sufficiently confuse a great many issues.
SWWASAS Posted November 6, 2015 BFF Patron Posted November 6, 2015 Well for sure the local tribes at the time he was alive did not think Kennewick man one of their own or they would not have put a arrow in his hip.
Faenor Posted November 6, 2015 Posted November 6, 2015 Yes neighboring tribes of indegenous people rarely fought or killed one another. No never, also the neighboring countries of western europe always got along. 1
ShadowBorn Posted November 6, 2015 Moderator Posted November 6, 2015 But would not an arrow be a dead give away for the way it was made by man ? and by whom ? Just like the bones and the teeth marks on bones they would match to who ever made them right ?
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 6, 2015 Posted November 6, 2015 I detect a bit of bigfoot anti logic/antiscience going on now. Seems whenever an articulate well presented and learned position about anything threatening the bigfoot possibility the cries go out that said solid but threatening presentation must be in error or that nobody actually knows the truth. Kennewick man took an arrow in him but who is to say that the arrow as the result of him being a cultural outsider? Maybe the arrow got shot into him because he was playing around with the chiefs wife or daughter. Maybe he wronged a vindictive villager. Individuals off individuals regardless of the overall cultural disposition.
ShadowBorn Posted November 6, 2015 Moderator Posted November 6, 2015 My apologies, DNA does prove him to our Native Americans and as they call him the ancient one. As it shows that he might have come from the Colville tribe which was situated 200 miles from where he was found. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/american-anthropological-association/the-dangers-of-kennewick-_b_7690220.html The question would be is who shot him and why ? The arrow would be the key to that and were these tribes at peace in his time ?
jayjeti Posted November 7, 2015 Posted November 7, 2015 (edited) Part of the problem perhaps with the use of aboriginal with reference to the Americas is that as far as science knows we all migrated here. There are no known ancestor of modern man that originated in the Americas. The term Native American is a misnomer. I don't see the problem with the use of aboriginal or Native American as far as how those words are commonly used in our language. All species have migrated around and evolved over time if you want to venture down that route. The aboringinal people of Australia may have arrived as far back as 60,000 years ago. My point is we can't re-ascribe proper usages of established words by creating new paradigms for them. The definition posted here earlier is 1. (of human races, animals, and plants) inhabiting or existing in a land from the earliest times or from before the arrival of colonists; indigenous. Edited November 7, 2015 by jayjeti
SomeCreepinaVan Posted November 7, 2015 Posted November 7, 2015 Man, you guys really like going off topic.
norseman Posted November 7, 2015 Admin Posted November 7, 2015 Was the Kennewick Man first Nations by your definition? He did not come from Europe. He is genetically different than First Nations People. If he got here that early how many others came here as early or earlier that are genetically different than what we accept as First Nations People. How early and where did they come from? I have no idea and you certainly don't. In June 2015, scientists at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark determined through DNA from 8,500-year-old bones that Kennewick Man is in fact related to contemporary Native Americans, including those from the region where his bones were found.[9] The international team of scientists had confirmed this finding to the Army Corps of Engineers as far back as 2013.[9] Chatters, the discoverer of the bones, had long changed his mind after finding similar skull shapes among confirmed ancestors of Native Americans.[9] The results did not surprise scientists who study the genetics of ancient people, as almost all Paleoamericans "have shown strong genetic ties with modern Native Americans".[9] Analysis showed that Kennewick Man is “very closely related to the Colville" tribe in northeast Washington.[10] The results were published inNature magazine.[11] Public officials such as Governor Inslee and Senator Murray have since called on the Corps of Engineers, who retained possession of Kennewick Man, to return the remains to Native American tribes.[12][13] There is no such thing as a "colville tribe". There are 12 distinct tribes all sharing the same reservation, and they are not all related. Also google "ice age columbus", our history books are wrong.
Recommended Posts