[QUOTE=tomndebb]
On the other hand, the 19th and 20th centuries are full of examples of European-based societies holding up (their understanding at the time of) “science” as a justification to interfere with the lives of indigenous peoples–or to destroy them–and the fear among those peoples has a logical basis.
[/QUOTE]
There are many examples of white American society trying to disrupt Native American culture and religion. And can you honestly say that no missionary group is ever going to try to use this information to try to convert tribe members away from their traditional religion?
[QUOTE=DanBlather]
Don’t the Mormons think Native Americans are “the Lost Tribes of israel”.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Israel is in Asia.
[/QUOTE]
Wow, tomndebb. I know we’re in the Pit and not in GQ, but since the overall goal of the SDMB is to fight ignorance do you really think such snarkiness was warranted? I generally value your contributions to the board. Why the sudden attitude?
Maybe you’ve sufficient history with DanBlather to know he likes to find amusement in “stirring up shit” about the Lost Tribes, Mormans, or Native Americans, or whatever. As far as I can tell, however, it was an innocent question and a sincere request for clarification.
I’ve no doubt that DanBlather knows that Israel is in Asia. Of course, however, he was asking about the Lost Tribes. Being “lost”, explanations of their whereabouts needn’t be confined to Asia.
The prophet Mormon is believed to have been a Nephite.
Although some would say that the Mormon belief is ungrounded fanciful imagination, your query about those beliefs was not at all ungrounded. You question certainly didn’t have to be met with a snarky dismissal.
[QUOTE=bienville]
Although some would say that the Mormon belief is ungrounded fanciful imagination, your query about those beliefs was not at all ungrounded. You question certainly didn’t have to be met with a snarky dismissal.
[/QUOTE]
I have no beef with DanBlather. I have no beef with the CoJCoLDS.
It was a one-off response to this series of comments:
In other words: First poster says “Everyone knows they came from Asia.”
Second poster says “Aren’t they from Israel?”.
Third poster says “Israel is in Asia.”
Simple riff on the statements as presented with no comment on the actual origin of the American indigenes and no commnt on the beliefs of either the American indigenes or any particular religion.
Bienville thanks for sticking up for me, but I was being a moron. I thought the Middle East was considered Africa not Asia. :smack: I didn’t think the reply was snarky.
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Simple riff on the statements as presented with no comment on the actual origin of the American indigenes and no commnt on the beliefs of either the American indigenes or any particular religion.
Next time I’ll try to use a smiley.
[/QUOTE]
Gotcha. Sorry for the accusation of snarkiness, which I did think of as out of character for you. In my defense I had just watched Superman III, in which Superman becomes temporarily evil. I thought if it could happen to Superman it could happen to anyone.
Now imagining tomndebb straightening the Tower of Pisa before doing battle with himself in a junk yard
[QUOTE=John Mace]
That’s what I’m going to do. I’m doing Mom’s side and having my brother do Dad’s side. I even made it easyfor him by buying bro’ a kit for his Christmas present.
I’m not sure how they do Dad’s side for girls since I figure they used the Y chromosome for that, and they use the mtDNA for Mom’s side. We all have Mom’s mtDNA, but only us guys have Dad’s Y chromosome.
[/QUOTE]
You don’t choose which side to do. It’s Mom’s side for women, Dad’s side for men.
Guess they thought it was discriminatory to give guys a chance and women none… :smack:
So if your bro and you get very different results, ask for an explanation pronto!
[QUOTE=dropzone]
Bear in mind–and this is no reflection on your mother, necessarily :eek: --that somewhere between 10% and 30% of people were fathered by someone other than who they thought did it. On the low end of risk you may not getaccurate results. On the high end you may be opening a can of dirty laundry.
[/QUOTE]
Considering how much they take after Dad’s side, if either Bro was not made by him then it was by a close enough relative to get the same info… or by someone who looked enough like him to fool her (heck, when I found out she used to have a crush on James Stewart I spent weeks bursting out laughing at random, because Dad was such a JS lookalike)
I’d be more willing to believe that I was illegitimate, since I got made in the only night my parents spent together in eight weeks.
[QUOTE=Nava]
You don’t choose which side to do. It’s Mom’s side for women, Dad’s side for men.
Guess they thought it was discriminatory to give guys a chance and women none… :smack:
So if your bro and you get very different results, ask for an explanation pronto!
[/QUOTE]
Ah, you’re right. Somehow I thought I read that you get to choose one of the two tests. And that makes more sense, anyway, as I pointed out above.
I guess bro’ is going to get his kit confiscated and I’ll be sending it to one of my female cousins on mom’s side. Mom has a gazzilion sisters, so there are plenty to choose from.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
We already fucking know that they came from Asia. Even the YECs agree with that, don’t they?
[/QUOTE]
I’m not really sure in what way that was a response to my post.
But anyway – Is it a forgone conclusion that Indians came from Asia? Genetically, it would be interesting to find out, but I recently heard about some evidence that Indians probably came from Europe, and not over the Bearing Straight. Their ancient tools and clothing were very European in style, and nothing like those from Asia.
Maybe this is a question for a different forum. But it’s interesting to think that the latest styles were coming out of France even way back then.
[QUOTE=tdn]
But anyway – Is it a forgone conclusion that Indians came from Asia? Genetically, it would be interesting to find out, but I recently heard about some evidence that Indians probably came from Europe, and not over the Bearing Straight. Their ancient tools and clothing were very European in style, and nothing like those from Asia.
[/QUOTE]
It is possible that the Americas were settled from two directions. There have been a few cases offered to demonstrate a trans-Atlantic colonization.
On the other hand, we already have solid genetic evidence of a trans-Pacific migration (or several migrations).
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
It is possible that the Americas were settled from two directions. There have been a few cases offered to demonstrate a trans-Atlantic colonization.
On the other hand, we already have solid genetic evidence of a trans-Pacific migration (or several migrations).
[/QUOTE]
I’ll buy that.
I have to wonder if both groups intermingled, or if mutiple genetic lines stayed more or less intact.
[QUOTE=tdn]
I’m not really sure in what way that was a response to my post.
[/quote]
The “fucking” part was a reference to the creationists, not you. It’s just that they seem to be acting like there’s some doubt about where their ancestors came from, when there isn’t any.
Genetically, modern Indians are most closely related to Asians, not Europeans. There are some very controversial hypotheses about some immigration from Europe based on superficial similarities to clovis points and some European blades, but none concerning clothing that I know of. However, this is very contorversial, and I doubt you’d find more than a handful of anthropologists who accept it. More likely, there might have been an earlier wave of South Asian immigrants before the North Asian immigrants came and eventually became the American Indians.
Also, it’s not realy important, as I said in a later post, whether they came from Asia or anywhere else-- they absolutely didn’t “originate” in the Americas, as per their creation myths.
Interesting. I wondered how mainstream the idea was.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
Also, it’s not realy important, as I said in a later post, whether they came from Asia or anywhere else-- they absolutely didn’t “originate” in the Americas, as per their creation myths.
[/QUOTE]
We might disagree on how important it is. I’m absolutely fascinated by it, though not terribly educated on it.
What’s funny is that until my dad and I set her straight, my mother was convinced that humanity (and other species) sort of evolved all over the world all at once.
[QUOTE=tdn]
I have to wonder if both groups intermingled, or if mutiple genetic lines stayed more or less intact.
[/QUOTE]
We’re talking humans, here. The stronger group wiped out the weaker group except to take home a few nubile women (who may have then been knocked off by the previously established wives).
[QUOTE=tomndebb]
We’re talking humans, here. The stronger group wiped out the weaker group except to take home a few nubile women (who may have then been knocked off by the previously established wives).
[/QUOTE]
Rape of war captives doesn’t count as intermingling?
[QUOTE=tdn]
Interesting. I wondered how mainstream the idea was.
We might disagree on how important it is. I’m absolutely fascinated by it, though not terribly educated on it.
[/quote]
Just to be clear, I’m absolutely fascinated by it, too. I meant that it’s not important from the standpoint of debunking their creation myth-- we know that the ancestors of American Indians came from somewhere outside the Americas.
Hey, at least she thought the evolved! My mother would’ve said God created us as is, where we are (and that the different groups weren’t meant to intermingle). Mom was more than a bit of a racist, I’m afraid.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
Hey, at least she thought the evolved!
[/QUOTE]
She’s a smart lady. The thing is, she just became the deaconess of a conservative southern church in which liberals, evolutionists, and abortionists are all going to hell. Funny thing is, she is still staunchly liberal. And my father constantly and openly questions the minister.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
Just to be clear, I’m absolutely fascinated by it, too. I meant that it’s not important from the standpoint of debunking their creation myth-- we know that the ancestors of American Indians came from somewhere outside the Americas.
[/quote]
And no one really wants to debunk their creation myth - we just want it to not get in the way of science. The study should find if there was intermingling, and from where.
I want to see how many of Genghis Khan’s genes I’ve got - I suspect at least a few.
I believe that there was a school that said homo sapiens, or perhaps a precursor, evolved independently in several places. I don’t believe that this involved different races being created, it was just an explanation for a belief that the migration that happened was implausible.
I think the genetic Eve took care of this school, if it was not discredited earlier. So maybe tdn’s mother heard this outside of church.
[QUOTE=tdn]
She’s a smart lady. The thing is, she just became the deaconess of a conservative southern church in which liberals, evolutionists, and abortionists are all going to hell. Funny thing is, she is still staunchly liberal. And my father constantly and openly questions the minister.
[/QUOTE]
Good for them! I think our country would be much better as a whole if we had more such liberals in conservative southern churches. I’m not one who fears an American Theocracy or anything, but the religious right has far more influence here than suits me and my vision of what is best for the country.
[QUOTE=tdn]
She’s a smart lady. The thing is, she just became the deaconess of a conservative southern church in which liberals, evolutionists, and abortionists are all going to hell. Funny thing is, she is still staunchly liberal. And my father constantly and openly questions the minister.
[/QUOTE]
That ain’t no conservative church if they allow women deacons. Your lies have been exposed!
