Re: Polynesian canoes Rat genes and Pacific migrations no mystery

From: benlizross (benlizro_at_ihug.co.nz)
Date: 07/29/04 

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 09:32:58 +1200

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
>
> Peter Ashby wrote:
> >
> > Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@trends.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Peter Ashby wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@trends.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > pashby@blueyonder.co.ruk (Peter Ashby) wrote in message
> > > > news:<1ghceyh.1xb4olb1vspuwwN%pashby@blueyonder.co.ruk>...
> > > > > > Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@trends.ca> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Peter Ashby wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@trends.ca> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Peter Ashby wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@trends.ca> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Reposting the same things over and over again doesn't make
> > > > > > > > > > > them true.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Yuri.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Been looking in that mirror again Yuri? Glad to know that you
> > > > > > > > > > are achieving self knowledge at last. Does this mean you are
> > > > > > > > > > going to post some new stuff? Or maybe something published after
> > > > > > > > > > 1960?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Peter
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This is truly an ignorant comment. I've presented all sorts
> > > > > > > > > of evidence from after 1960.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Most recently about the Native American long distance
> > > > > > > > > trading networks, that went thousands miles into the
> > > > > > > > > Pacific. The evidence from 1995.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From: Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@clio.trends.ca>
> > > > > > > > > Subject: ANCIENT MARINERS: Andean-Mexican seagoing trade
> > > > > > > > > Newsgroups:
> > > > > > > > > sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,rec.crafts.metalworking
> > > > > > > > > Date: 5 Jul 2004 12:41:23 -0400
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=40e984b3%40news.nnrp.ca
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > perhaps you could find the passages which you understand to
> > > > > > > > support the claim above where you imply 'thousands of miles INTO
> > > > > > > > the pacific' when all the passage you cite says is thousands of
> > > > > > > > miles along the pacific coast. Quite a different thing. Or maybe
> > > > > > > > you thought I wouldn't be bothered to read it?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yet again Yuri is found to be unable to properly interpret
> > > > > > > > things, probably due to the Heyerdahl tinted specs he insists on
> > > > > > > > viewing things through. If this is the best cite you have in
> > > > > > > > favour of claims post 1960 then its no wonder you run back to
> > > > > > > > 1888.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Peter
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Your original comment was ignorant and slanderous.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But now you're attempting to change the subject to something
> > > > > > > else... Nice try...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I didn't think you could find a passage to support your insinuation. So
> > > > > > instead you pretend that challenge didn't exist. So, yet again when
> > > > > > caught hoist with your own petard you make a fool of yourself by
> > > > > > pretending you are not hanging there, swinging in the wind.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Peter
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, I'll play. How many miles did they go into the Pacific, according
> > > > > to you?
> > > >
> > > > No Yuri, you are the one who made the claim, then when asked to support
> > > > it cited a source which does no such thing. If you are not man enough to
> > > > admit you got it wrong then I am not going to help you draw a figleaf
> > > > over you rnakedness by being drawn into one of your little fantasy
> > > > games.
> > > >
> > > > Peter
> > > > --
> > > > Add my middle initial to email me. It has become attached to a country
> > >
> > > And I was right. The distance between Peru and California is
> > > something like 5000 miles.
> >
> > Which is not 'thousands of miles INTO the pacific'. If all you wanted to
> > demonstrate was a coastal trading route then why did you post it in
> > response to a discussion on deep ocean crossing technology?
> >
> > Either you got it wrong or your understanding of the significance of
> > data is seriously suspect and not worthy of a first year undergrad
> > essay. Either reason is more than enough reason to ignore anything you
> > say or quote about evidence.
> >
> > Peter
> > --
> > Add my middle initial to email me. It has become attached to a country
>
> You have no idea what course they took through the Pacific.
>
> So how many miles did they go into the Pacific, according to
> you?
>
> Yuri.
>
> Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku
>
> "Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so,
> it might be, and if it were so, it would be; but as it
> isn't, it ain't. That's logic!"
> -- Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass"

If I might intervene here, the theory being discussed appears to be the
same one that Yuri drew our attention to a few years ago. There is an
account at

http://www.sfu.ca/~csmith/genstuff/manteno/report99/report.html

of an attempt to recreate a prehistoric raft voyage from Ecuador to
western Mexico, motivated by apparent evidence of trade contact between
the two areas, not involving the places in between. At the bottom of
that page you can find a link to a map of the expedition's course, which
to that date had got no further than Panama.
At that time (see the threaad "Polynesian Potshots" of December 2000)
Yuri attempted to parlay this specific hypothesis into a claim that
"sailing rafts were well known all up and down the coasts of North and
South America".
This time, he is using the same hypothesis to claim that these people
sailed thousands of miles out into the Pacific. In neither case does the
evidence presented justify his claim.
Let me suggest that in order to get from Ecuador (or Peru or Colombia)
to western Mexico, one would not need to sail far out to sea, certainly
no further than the 900 km to the Galapagos, which we already know were
reached by pre-Columbian voyagers from South America.

Ross Clark

Relevant Pages
Quantcast