FEATURES | MUSIC | BOOKS | DRINKS | FORUMS | GAMES | LINKS | ABOUT


advertise on Tiki Central

Celebrating classic and modern Polynesian Pop
  [Edit Profile]  [Edit Preferences]  [Search] [Sign Up]
[Personal Messages]  [Member List]  [Help/FAQ]  [Rules]  [Login]
Tiki Central Forums General Tiki Did Polynesian voyagers visit Colombia?
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 )
Did Polynesian voyagers visit Colombia?
tikitube
Grand Member (first year)  

Joined: Apr 25, 2017
Posts: 279
From: Ozark Underwater Cliffs
Posted: 2018-02-05 7:26 pm   Permalink

Problem is...Suggs' already presented his evidence throughout the book. There was no need to be rude and condescending if he had already made his case. Also, it does no good to refute against a straw man, unless your audience takes what you say to be gospel.

In most cases, we reflect on what we've written before putting it out there for public consumption, especially when it comes to print. That Suggs allowed his personal diatribe against Heyerdahl to taint his otherwise scholarly journal is a shame and leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

I also would find it ironic if his rant was as you suggested fueled by a disgust of pop culture since Suggs himself is nowadays (according to Wikipedia, anyways) charming cruise ship tourists with his tales of expedition.

If you can't beat them, join them, I guess.


 
View Profile of tikitube Send a personal message to tikitube      Edit/Delete This Post Reply with quote
Prikli Pear
Tiki Socialite

Joined: Jan 04, 2017
Posts: 622
From: New Braunfels, Texas
Posted: 2018-02-05 8:34 pm   Permalink

The great thing about science is that fact will eventually win out. When theory is accepted broadly enough, long enough, it becomes dogma and ossifies. Evidence to the contrary is resisted. Given enough time and persistence, however, the preponderance of evidence wins out. There's a human tendency to want everything to fit into neat boxes. It's out evolutionary predisposition toward pattern recognition at work. But history and culture aren't neat and linear. The Clovis culture was long accepted as the oldest homo sapiens presence in North America, and is still taught as such in many textbooks. But the Gault site less than 90 miles away from me is turning up artifacts far older and pushing human habitation of the New World back tens of thousands of years. And there are other sites scattered around the continent with a similar impact. It'll be decades or longer before this new knowledge supplants the Clovis narrative. But it will happen.

The Kontiki expedition was hardly rigorous research in the academic sense, but Thor's efforts, although unorthodox, generated valuable data points. I expect that someday he'll be acknowledged for "proof of concept" if nothing else.


 
View Profile of Prikli Pear Send a personal message to Prikli Pear  Email Prikli Pear Goto the website of Prikli Pear     Edit/Delete This Post Reply with quote
EnchantedTikiGoth
Tiki Socialite

Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Posts: 332
From: Calgary, Canada
Posted: 2018-02-06 10:36 pm   Permalink

Quote:

On 2018-02-05 20:34, Prikli Pear wrote:
The Clovis culture was long accepted as the oldest homo sapiens presence in North America, and is still taught as such in many textbooks. But the Gault site less than 90 miles away from me is turning up artifacts far older and pushing human habitation of the New World back tens of thousands of years.



At the risk of derailing, "Clovis first" hasn't been the model for about a decade... So much so that I don't even MENTION the "Clovis first" theory in the book I'm writing about the Ice Age

As you say, the evidence will out, and there is sufficient evidence at this point to show that while Clovis may be the first coherent culture to develop in the New World, they weren't the first people. The Gault site pushes evidence of human occupation back about 3000 years before Clovis, not tens of thousands. That is pretty consistent with the rest of the evidence for early habitation, which MAY push things back as far as 19,000 years. One could argue that humans migrated into North America during a warm period around 30,000 years ago, but there is no evidence to support that argument at present. What has emerged as the new standard model is that around 18,000-20,0000 years ago or so, people traveled down the coast of British Columbia, either by boat or hopping between unglaciated refugia, entered through the Pacific Northwest, and spread out from there.


 
View Profile of EnchantedTikiGoth Send a personal message to EnchantedTikiGoth  Goto the website of EnchantedTikiGoth     Edit/Delete This Post Reply with quote
EnchantedTikiGoth
Tiki Socialite

Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Posts: 332
From: Calgary, Canada
Posted: 2018-02-06 10:39 pm   Permalink

Quote:

On 2018-02-05 19:26, tikitube wrote:
I also would find it ironic if his rant was as you suggested fueled by a disgust of pop culture since Suggs himself is nowadays (according to Wikipedia, anyways) charming cruise ship tourists with his tales of expedition.

If you can't beat them, join them, I guess.



Again, I can't speak for Suggs, but for myself, I didn't say it was a disdain for pop culture itself, but for how the narrative in pop culture gets dominated by certain pseudo-scientific ideas that achieved a certain cachet for one reason or another. There's nothing wrong with using the same means to try and set the record straight.


 
View Profile of EnchantedTikiGoth Send a personal message to EnchantedTikiGoth  Goto the website of EnchantedTikiGoth     Edit/Delete This Post Reply with quote
Prikli Pear
Tiki Socialite

Joined: Jan 04, 2017
Posts: 622
From: New Braunfels, Texas
Posted: 2018-02-07 6:30 pm   Permalink

I stand corrected. I'd gotten it in my head somewhere that the range was 20-30,000 years. I must've conflated it with something else.

 
View Profile of Prikli Pear Send a personal message to Prikli Pear  Email Prikli Pear Goto the website of Prikli Pear     Edit/Delete This Post Reply with quote
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 )
U-Moderate:
  
v1.5

[ About Tiki Central | Contact Tiki Central | Advertise on Tiki Central ]
(c) 2000-2018 Tikiroom.com (tm), Tiki Central (tm)

Credits & copyright infomation