Skip to comments.
New Study On Peopling Of Americas Confirms Some Theories, Unsettles Others
CSFA ^
| 9-2001
| Loring Brace
Posted on 11/07/2003 4:19:11 PM PST by blam
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
To: RightWhale
This research fascinates me. Thanks for the post.
It will be very interesting to see how all of this bears on native american land claim issues if it is proven that they, too, usurped this land.
21
posted on
11/07/2003 5:50:39 PM PST
by
JBBooks
To: JBBooks; blam
Blam posted this just as he has posted a lot of ancient peoples articles. Knowledge is growing rapidly; textbooks are being revised; 4000, 6000 years ago is not so long ago after all.
22
posted on
11/07/2003 5:57:28 PM PST
by
RightWhale
(Close your tag lines)
To: JBBooks
23
posted on
11/07/2003 6:01:26 PM PST
by
blam
To: RightWhale
The way the research is going there ain't no specific native americans.
24
posted on
11/07/2003 6:06:06 PM PST
by
Little Bill
("Roosevelt was the first Dictator of the United States"...My Grandfather)
To: blam
I don't believe this statement...On common human ancestry, see: The Royal We. This stuff can't be absolutely proven but seems highly likely.
To: blam; *Gods, Graves, Glyphs; Alas Babylon!; annyokie; bd476; BiffWondercat; Bilbo Baggins; billl; ..
26
posted on
11/07/2003 11:47:41 PM PST
by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: blam
I tend to agree with you...as always. LOL
To: Steve Eisenberg
It would be likely if mating was completely random, but we are much more inbred than that.
28
posted on
11/07/2003 11:54:05 PM PST
by
gd124
To: blam
Australian? "Crikey! And all along I thought me mates and me were Indians!"
I think they meant Australiods-Aborigines. They never found any Fosters cans or cricket bats in any dig I know of, LOL!
To: blam
I think you've got your labelling backward. The descendents of the folks from 15,000 years ago are the ones we'd call native Americans. The descendents fo the folks from 5,000 years ago we lump together as Eskimos.
30
posted on
11/08/2003 7:15:59 AM PST
by
Junior
("Your superior intellects are no match for our puny weapons!")
To: genefromjersey
"There was a secondary item, having to do with the fletching of arrows, and the carving of a spiral around arrow shafts."
Actually, according to my reading, there were no arrows in the Americas until 600 AD, which I believe is a critical insight if true (implying perhaps they came over with european incursions). Instead the arrowhead points were actually atlatl points from a small version. Of course, I may be smoking dope, but I think this is the case.
I'm sorry, but I saw the movie BoyZ N the Hood.
We all originate from Africa.
To: Junior
"I think you've got your labelling backward. The descendents of the folks from 15,000 years ago are the ones we'd call native Americans." Nope.
According to James Chatters (...Of Kennewick Man fame), no-one has ever found a skeleton of a Native American/American Indian in the Americas that is older than 6,000 years old. Skeletons found that are older than that are different people...and most are like Kennewick Man. This is supported by professor Christy Turner's dendro (teeth) study too.
Walter Neves work is further support.
There is one skeleton dubbed 'Stick Man' that is unlike anyone anywhere.
33
posted on
11/08/2003 8:42:37 AM PST
by
blam
To: blam
It needs repeating over and over:
Skeletons discovered in the Americas that are older than 6,000 years are not American Indian/Native American and should not be subject to their heritage claims.
All right, how do we go about undoing this cute bit of "control over the white man" BS?
Yes, even indians can play the "what can we do to screw them" because we can?
34
posted on
11/08/2003 8:46:54 AM PST
by
Publius6961
(40% of Californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
To: Junior
35
posted on
11/08/2003 8:56:15 AM PST
by
blam
To: Junior
36
posted on
11/08/2003 9:00:30 AM PST
by
blam
To: genefromjersey
If you really want to freak people out start looking for "cultural links" between the Vikings and the Seneca.
It doesn't produce nearly as many howls as it used to but you can still get some yelps.
37
posted on
11/08/2003 9:14:18 AM PST
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style)
To: JudyB1938
Check the two links in post #23. The Windover site (IMO) is one of the most exciting finds during your absence.
38
posted on
11/08/2003 3:25:49 PM PST
by
blam
To: blam; farmfriend
Thanks for the ping to those two links. I think I enjoy the interchange of ideas just about as much as the articles themselves. It may have something to do with the fact that farmfriend is making sure truly-interested and knowledgeable people find their way to your postings.
Farmfriend, please add me to the ping list. It's nice of you to take care of us. Appreciated!!
39
posted on
11/08/2003 10:31:29 PM PST
by
JudyB1938
(It's a wild world. There's a lot of bad and beware.)
To: blam
I wonder how this fits in with Cherokee indians that arrived here, what? About a thousand years ago from an island off S. America? Makes me wonder if there were a whole lot of influences other than Asian.
I watched a documentary that maintained, and pretty much proved that people would get together from different places in Europe and the middle east and join together to come here in their reed boats.
One cave was obviously set up for Druid worship with a mixture of symbols in both egyptian and durid and there was writing on the wall from a teenager that basically said something like "Johnny was here".
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson