Author:
admin
[ Edit | View ]
|
Date Posted: 23:48:47 05/16/14 Fri
The biggest recent headline "Flooded cave hides Naia, a 13,000-year-old Native American, disproving theories of ancient European Migration." quickly delved into a bitter theological debate.
Most mainstream articles began arguing against the hypothesis of ancient European Migrations into proto-America.
This is a typical example of Shotty Journalism.
There's nothing wrong with giving scientific information. But, the silly commentary has got to go.
-------
There are several points to raise.
1) Many ancient skulls in the Western USA are said to be either Polynesian/East Asian, African or Aboriginal types; as well as Asian Siberian. The European Migration theory primarily focuses on Eastern United States. So, it's ironic how these articles don't debunk east Asian theories. Instead, they attempt to attack the European hypothesis.
2) Asian skulls are noticeably different than European skulls. But, the skulls of East Asians, Caucasians, or Tribal Africans are initially less noticeable.
SO, many skulls in Western America & South America were initially thought to be of possible Aboriginal/ East Asian origin. Note: Aboriginals are NOT Africans. And, any ancient migrations are not necessarily from Australian Aborigines. They were probably not related to any living peoples.
But, the mainstream media failed to debunk these theories. Nope. Just-as-suspected; They're only going after the Europeans.
3) Ancient Migrations from Europe (AKA "THE Solutrean Theory") has adequate evidence to be considered fact. BUT, any migrations into Western USA has always been merely speculative.
4) The Solutrean Theory doesn't claim "European Discovery of the Americas". Instead, the Solutreans would be considered "Caucasoid".
5) The Scientific claims that American Indians once had different skulls only proves they were a completely different people. Nothing similar to today's Native Americans.(It doesn't matter whether or not they're genetic ancestors.)
6) Most importantly:
When this story broke- Notice how the media attempted to group all 'native Americans' as one quasi homogenous group.
7)There's also archeological evidence which suggests ancient aboriginal migration into South America. But, there's no DNA evidence. The lack of DNA evidence does not disprove theories.
8) Scientists have a nasty habit of proving or disproving all evidence based upon a singular specimen. And, this Naia discovery is another example. A woman of apparent Native American ancestry was found. Even the Solutrean Theorists don't deny Native American presence in proto-America.
--------------------------
Personally, I'm pro-Native American.
I never claimed to be anti-American Indian.
But, we mustn't mix Science and dogma.
----------------------------
This is why so many people are turned off by Science.
...My goal is to change this.
Science and discovery can be a great thing.
IT could save humanity in the future.
It's up to you, whether or not Science can fully gain public support.
I'm depending upon the Scientific community to ease public opinion.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
|
Feedback: 