[counterrevolutionary]

"It is a completely crazy and unsupported hypothesis," said Lawrence Guy Straus, a professor in the anthropology department at the University of New Mexico and an expert on the Upper Paleolithic period in Western Europe....

Straus also said the Stanford/Bradley theory has angered some American Indian groups whose ancestry has been tied to Asia, not Europe.

"It is basically saying they weren't here first," Straus said.

I have no idea whether this hypothesis is true or not, and the burden of proof is on those who claim it is.

But is Mr. Straus suggesting that the fact that some Indians don't like the theory has some bearing upon whether or not the theory is true?

[afraidfortherepublic]

But is Mr. Straus suggesting that the fact that some Indians don't like the theory has some bearing upon whether or not the theory is true?

I think he's saying that it would be non-PC for any agency to provide money to research any other theory.