To: blam
...ruling explicitly concludes there is no evidence of a genetic or cultural link between Kennewick Man and the modern-day tribes.I can't say I'm too enthused about any court, especially this one, determining what is scientifically correct.
27 posted on
02/07/2004 3:47:12 PM PST by
curmudgeonII
(Time wounds all heels.)
To: curmudgeonII
It's true, though. Courts decide on the basis of scientific evidence all the time, and this guy bears no relation to any recent tribes. Look at the pictures. It's clear. Because of the way the law was written, any remains found on their ancestral lands are theirs, but science has trumped badly written law.
To: curmudgeonII
"I can't say I'm too enthused about any court, especially this one, determining what is scientifically correct."
Really! Does that mean you don't agree with scientific forensic evidence being used in trials, either?
Can I put you on record saying that you'd prefer rapists and murderers to be walking the streets?
64 posted on
02/07/2004 6:11:09 PM PST by
adam_az
(Be vewy vewy qwiet, I'm hunting weftists.)
To: curmudgeonII
I can't say I'm too enthused about any court, especially this one, determining what is scientifically correct. Sure beats having a bureaucrat do it on a whim (Babbit), or the Indians based on their ignorance and PC and nothing else.
87 posted on
02/07/2004 8:08:04 PM PST by
Publius6961
(40% of Californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson