Thread: Columbus was in U.S. FIRST !!!

Originally Posted by Steel

Pretty sure the Anishinaabe and hundreds of other tribes were here first. Smh. Unless of course you disregard hundreds of native peoples creation/history accounts and insert scientific findings that change like the seasons.

Well, yes and no on that one. Yes to the Anishinaabe and hundreds of other tribes being the first to the Americas. No to scientific findings that change like the seasons.

It has been pretty well established scientifically that the first is true and has been accepted for as long as I can remember. The scientific evidence just keeps getting better for this theory The 'First Americans': Humans arrived in THREE great migrations across land bridge from Siberia - and DNA differences can still be detected today | Mail Online .

The greatest thing the peoples of the Americas have in common is that we were all immigrants at one time or another and have on heck of a deep shared gene pool because of it.

Bob

I guess being old and bitter, it should come as no surprise when I ask, "who cares?"

Were the Earth to be discovered by a few random aliens who didn't have the ability to populate it, or convince others that they should come in droves and populate it - would we complain that history needed to be rewritten?

I mean don't get me wrong. I am in complete favor of accuracy. Matter a fact, it bothers me to no end that no one writes at length as to how many of those who were native to the region died because of the introduction of infectious diseases. By all accounts according the the BBC news story I was listening to yesterday, 90% of those living here (the America's - North, South, and Central) died. Seems high? But what do I know? We never talk about it here.

If that many did die, that would mean then that there were HUGE civilizations with enormous city's that existed before europeans arrived to the Americas - not just a bunch of rag-tag nomadic peoples.

Of course I am being silly because most historians know this already - it just never makes it to the history books. If it did - Franchises like the Red Skins, the Lone Ranger etc, etc, would really be an issue LOL!!

The Lone Ranger??? What's wrong with that? If you're knocking him, well if you were here you'd be deep sixed.

Actually in those days there were only two shows that attempted to give natives a reasonable role. The Lone Ranger was one, and Yancy Derringer was the second.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

,,,,,,,,,,,,,Yancy Derringer was the second.

Yancy Derringer ??? Who the heck was that ?? A silent movie ? or was he one of the actors in “Buffalo Bill” Cody Wild West Show ???

Did you get his autograph??


,,,still love ya TBS,,,,

Yancy Derringer......can't tell you how many decades it has been since I thought of that name. Yancy was kind of a dandy who did not need a Peacemaker or SAA to settle his arguments. HIs sidekick's name in real life was X Brands. This just floods the memory of the number of bodies stacked up over the years that I have seen in either TV or the movies and how the act of shooting someone for pretend has changed. Back in the old cowboy movies, a lot of fights were settled with fists where no one lost their hats, then completely bloodless shootings. Now if you don't have brains blown on the wall you feel sort of cheated out of someone breaking one of the Commandments.

Originally Posted by BobH

Well, yes and no on that one. Yes to the Anishinaabe and hundreds of other tribes being the first to the Americas. No to scientific findings that change like the seasons.

It has been pretty well established scientifically that the first is true and has been accepted for as long as I can remember. The scientific evidence just keeps getting better for this theory The 'First Americans': Humans arrived in THREE great migrations across land bridge from Siberia - and DNA differences can still be detected today | Mail Online .

The greatest thing the peoples of the Americas have in common is that we were all immigrants at one time or another and have on heck of a deep shared gene pool because of it.

Bob

Well bob, there are quite a few "problems" still to be worked out with this "theory". That is why it is called a theroy. I will touch on just a few.

1. Dr. Goodyear of the University of South Carolina has recently found carbon fingerprints dating thousands of years prior to the last glacial period which would contradict the Bering straight "theory". He is not alone. They are currently investigating many other findings in South America that report to have confirmed this! They also once believed a "theory" called Clovis which has recently been debunked. Your link above shows that there is yet another "theory" that there were three separate migrations now.

2. Popular thinking is that Natvie Americans are one people. This is not true at all! Even with so-called scientific studies that suggest Native Americans have a genetic ancestor it is still an undeniable fact that of the 375+ tribes once here (many tribes were massacred by Columbus, early spainiards, and others) over 200 of them are as different as Chinese and African people. So describing how a handful of tribes migrated doesn't account for the other couple hundred.

3. (The biggest problem in my book) they are denying the history accounts of thousands of people!!! Talk about self centered ignorance! (Scientists not you Bob) I choose to believe in an arrow point found in the ground and carbon dated even though whole nations of people are telling me different. This is not scientific fact they are scientific theories. They are called theories for a reason. They DONT know for sure but everyone regurgitates these findings as fact. Do you want to know the fact just go ask the people themselves. They are still here! How frustrating would it be for you to have someone tell you that you don't live in the house where you say you live because they have evidence otherwise. A little know fact is that the land bridge theory was first proposed by a Jesuit priest, Jose de Acosta, with no scientific findings. It just made sense to him and lined up with HIS religious teachings of Adam and Eve. Could there have been an ulterior motive perhaps?

There are many other problems with these "theories" which is why they are still being studied and debated. What you quote is only the most recent finding supporting another (3 separate migrations) theory. This is not fact.

Originally Posted by Steel

Well bob, there are quite a few "problems" still to be worked out with this "theory". That is why it is called a theroy. I will touch on just a few.

1. Dr. Goodyear of the University of South Carolina has recently found carbon fingerprints dating thousands of years prior to the last glacial period which would contradict the Bering straight "theory". He is not alone. They are currently investigating many other findings in South America that report to have confirmed this! They also once believed a "theory" called Clovis which has recently been debunked. Your link above shows that there is yet another "theory" that there were three separate migrations now.

2. Popular thinking is that Natvie Americans are one people. This is not true at all! Even with so-called scientific studies that suggest Native Americans have a genetic ancestor it is still an undeniable fact that of the 375+ tribes once here (many tribes were massacred by Columbus, early spainiards, and others) over 200 of them are as different as Chinese and African people. So describing how a handful of tribes migrated doesn't account for the other couple hundred.

3. (The biggest problem in my book) they are denying the history accounts of thousands of people!!! Talk about self centered ignorance! (Scientists not you Bob) I choose to believe in an arrow point found in the ground and carbon dated even though whole nations of people are telling me different. This is not scientific fact they are scientific theories. They are called theories for a reason. They DONT know for sure but everyone regurgitates these findings as fact. Do you want to know the fact just go ask the people themselves. They are still here! How frustrating would it be for you to have someone tell you that you don't live in the house where you say you live because they have evidence otherwise. A little know fact is that the land bridge theory was first proposed by a Jesuit priest, Jose de Acosta, with no scientific findings. It just made sense to him and lined up with HIS religious teachings of Adam and Eve. Could there have been an ulterior motive perhaps?

There are many other problems with these "theories" which is why they are still being studied and debated. What you quote is only the most recent finding supporting another (3 separate migrations) theory. This is not fact.

Yea, that is why I called it a theory not a fact. Common acceptance of a theory only means that it is the most likely possibility until proven otherwise. There is evidence that was found in some Oregon caves a few years ago that suggested there were people in North America that pre date the Clovis bunch. Things are pretty fluid still with no clear cur answers.

Add to that the theory of Pangea where a supposed super continent separated over millions of years to form the continents as we know them today. It is not to hard to think that different groups of people were at different times isolated on the newly forming continents and pre date the Clovis bunch. The difference between being an immigrant by choice or being a forced immigrant by the circumstance of being stranded.

Different people from various parts of the world have differing genes. As these groups migrate and mingle the genes change to a greater or lesser extent. Native Americans are not likely one homogeneous group of people but have shared genes again some to a greater or lesser extent from others. I don't see a problem in thinking there is different ancestry to these tribes.

As far as passing down history verbally goes, that can be as flawed as scientific theorizing. Any language, I don't care whose language, evolves and changes over time leading to slightly different interpretations to the original meanings. Never mind the possibility that pieces are lost/forgotten over time. Almost certainly there still remains a grain of truth in current interpretations of verbal histories just how much is up for debate also.

Verbal history and scientific facts, not the theories, become more interesting when they support each other when looking at the whole puzzle. There are still many pieces of the puzzle missing and a clear picture has not really emerged yet.

No, I do not want to get into religion as that is another but similar can of worms with all kinds of theories in and of itself.

Bob

Originally Posted by Steel

Well bob, there are quite a few "problems" still to be worked out with this "theory". That is why it is called a theroy. I will touch on just a few.

1. Dr. Goodyear of the University of South Carolina has recently found carbon fingerprints dating thousands of years prior to the last glacial period which would contradict the Bering straight "theory". He is not alone. They are currently investigating many other findings in South America that report to have confirmed this! They also once believed a "theory" called Clovis which has recently been debunked. Your link above shows that there is yet another "theory" that there were three separate migrations now.

2. Popular thinking is that Natvie Americans are one people. This is not true at all! Even with so-called scientific studies that suggest Native Americans have a genetic ancestor it is still an undeniable fact that of the 375+ tribes once here (many tribes were massacred by Columbus, early spainiards, and others) over 200 of them are as different as Chinese and African people. So describing how a handful of tribes migrated doesn't account for the other couple hundred.

3. (The biggest problem in my book) they are denying the history accounts of thousands of people!!! Talk about self centered ignorance! (Scientists not you Bob) I choose to believe in an arrow point found in the ground and carbon dated even though whole nations of people are telling me different. This is not scientific fact they are scientific theories. They are called theories for a reason. They DONT know for sure but everyone regurgitates these findings as fact. Do you want to know the fact just go ask the people themselves. They are still here! How frustrating would it be for you to have someone tell you that you don't live in the house where you say you live because they have evidence otherwise. A little know fact is that the land bridge theory was first proposed by a Jesuit priest, Jose de Acosta, with no scientific findings. It just made sense to him and lined up with HIS religious teachings of Adam and Eve. Could there have been an ulterior motive perhaps?

There are many other problems with these "theories" which is why they are still being studied and debated. What you quote is only the most recent finding supporting another (3 separate migrations) theory. This is not fact.

Again, I'll mention Kennewick Man, another theory that has archaeological discoveries that point to a theory of another migration, sharing more Caucasian characteristics, not traceable through any DNA evidence to relate to any existing "First Nations" in existence today and that pre-dates all other migrations by 6000-9000 years, to add to the discussion of various, "theories".

Kennewick Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You ever get the feeling that the more we think we know the less we really do know?

Bob

Originally Posted by BobH

You ever get the feeling that the more we think we know the less we really do know?

Bob

Couldn't agree more....