Re: America's White Injuns
M. Council (council@luna.cas.usf.edu)
Fri, 23 Aug 1996 15:53:32 -0400
On 21 Aug 1996 tyu@ecst.csuchico.edu wrote:
> In article <19AUG199613022965@cc.weber.edu>, <helliott@cc.weber.edu> wrote:
> >In article <AE3C87CD966844C8@ad40-210.compuserve.com<, 102217.121@compuserve.com (Mark K. Bilbo) writes...
> ><In article <839847336snz@drmac.demon.co.uk<,
> ><duncan <Duncan@drmac.demon.co.uk< wrote:
> ><
> ><< Suddenly my mailbox is jammed asking me for evidence of this. EVIDENCE
> ><<for Chrissakes?!!! there's O. J. Chimpson still running around and you're
> ><<asking me for evidence. Sheesh!
> ><
> ><Aryans the "original inhabitants" of the Americas? You're *funny!
>
> You have to understand that people like Mr Duncan use the term Aryan
> very loosely. Most likely when Mr Duncan saids "Aryan" he means
> Caucasoid people. Now what is Caucasoid you might ask. According to
> anthropologists,
cite, please?
Caucasoid is anyone who has a dolichocephalic head
> shape. Another words, they have a long face instead of round face
> like orientals, or bigger jaw bone like pure African blacks.
> They have no way
> of telling what race the skulls are except with head shapes.
uh... i beg to differ, but I have worked with forensic anthropologists
who can determine from femur shape [rollable or not], among other
tests to determine that a person is/was MOST LIKELY of a certain
ancestry.
thte cephalic index is not the end all, nor is it even in common use
anymore.
also, it may interest you to know that for the last 25 years or so,
physical anthropologists have been aware that there is actually more
genetic variation *within* one so-called "race" than there is
*between* them. This adds weight to the argument that what we know as
"races" have more biologically in common than differences, and are
really only social constructs. I will provide citations on request.
Every historical attempt to categorize humans
according to a heriarchic "race" structure has failed; ask yourself
why! There is but one race, imho...the human race!
>
> It is very possible that there was a Caucasoid type of people
> during the paleolithic age in America. Who knows what their
> skin color was or their eye shape.
Who cares what their skin color or eye shape was?
Skin color and eye shape are two variables that are great examples of
how flexible human beings are; the diversity illustrates how many
climactic, geographical changes human beings are able to accommodate and thrive
in.
>
> In Korea they also found bones of paleo Asians who are Caucasoid
> in skull shape.
honey, the skull shape arguments you are bringing up here are sadly
dated. no one believes them anymore. please bring yourself up to date.
i can provide references, if you like.
> Ainus are probably their descendants.
> But to say that these ancient Caucasoid Asians are the same race
> as Germanic people is pretty far fetched since the Ainus do not
> speak an Indo-European language.
>
Head shape and language do not *by themselves* indicate anything. Ask
any anthropologist in the AAA guide.
And please define race before you use it one more time.
> Oviousely *the* Aryan tribe from India did not migrate
> to North America since the term Aryan did
> not exist until after the neolithic age, but I understand what
> he is talking about.
>
And how would you know that the word did not previously exist? Since
written records only span back roughly 6,000 years, how can you know
what was in use in a predominantly oral culture of the neolithic??
> Mr Duncan's attempt to unite people based on head shape, skin color,
> and other phenotypical attributes is a very primitive form of
> unification. Thats how birds and animals get united.
I won't even touch this one.
> As people evolve, people tend to unite and discriminate people
> based on philosophy and religion. I think it's just a matter
> of time where people like Mr Duncan learn to catch up with rest
> of us, and learn to discriminate people based on their philosophy
> and religion.
How about realizing we are all part of the same life? And that there
is room for a lot of variation? And to "discriminate" based on the
content of one's character, and not religion, philosophy, or eye
color?
You talk about people evolving like there was one ine of evolution.
Please update yourself on this subject. Your post sounds like it was
lost behind a file cabinet for about a hundred years.
-maggie council, program assistant
graduate programs in applied anthropology
university of south florida
council@luna.cas.usf.edu
|