Native Americans travelled to East Polynesia

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Harte

Sweet potatoes and traces of DNA, right?

That it not evidence which favors either scenario. The fact that Polynesians were great seafarers during that time period, does.

The DNA is in Polynesia. No Polynesian DNA in SA (yet.)
I'm gonna stick to the evidence in hand for now. That evidence points to South Americans spreading DNA in Polynesia.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

The DNA is in Polynesia.

As are the potatoes. Neither one requires South Americans making the trip by their own devices.

That evidence points to South Americans spreading DNA in Polynesia.

I disagree. But you already know that.

Imagine those rats having to lay low so long on a voyage without getting eaten. After weeks at sea, the sight of one would be like eyeing a piece of tenderloin!!!

a reply to: charlyv

They could have been taken along for that very purpose.

a reply to: Phage

Interesting premise.
Kinda re-defines cruise cuisine.

As someone who grew up sailing I find all this fascinating.

a reply to: charlyv

They also took swine and dogs along, not as pets and surely by intention. Kalo was always there, as food and for use when they found someplace to plant it.

Explorers, and settlers.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Harte

The DNA is in Polynesia.

As are the potatoes. Neither one requires South Americans making the trip by their own devices.

That evidence points to South Americans spreading DNA in Polynesia.

I disagree. But you already know that.

I suggest a duel between you and Harte - with keyboards as the weapon of choice at 2 paces.

a reply to: Hanslune

As long as evidence is sparse, gladly.

And both are masked.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Hanslune

As long as evidence is sparse, gladly.

And both are masked.

As with most things archaeological/dealing with the past it will take time to verify and figure out the details. All over the world people will be looking with keen interest at that paper and his evidence

a reply to: Hanslune

Archeology has to deal with quite a lot of missing pieces. So any solid evidence would be highly prized. Even if this evidence pans out, it won't settle the question.

But Polynesians did it. Trust me.

(you've got mail, btw)

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Hanslune

Archeology has to deal with quite a lot of missing pieces. So any solid evidence would be highly prized. Even if this evidence pans out, it won't settle the question.

But Polynesians did it. Trust me.

(you've got mail, btw)

Not that I don't believe you, but the date of contact is about when the Polynesians started exploring, according to the study.

I'll need more evidence to accept that they started out by reaching South America and returning.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Hanslune

Archeology has to deal with quite a lot of missing pieces. So any solid evidence would be highly prized. Even if this evidence pans out, it won't settle the question.

But Polynesians did it. Trust me.

(you've got mail, btw)

Not that I don't believe you, but the date of contact is about when the Polynesians started exploring, according to the study.

I'll need more evidence to accept that they started out by reaching South America and returning.

Harte

I've been looking for that since I was 19 after my first trip to Easter Island. Still haven't found it. However with DNA we might find something in a skeleton not yet recovered

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Hanslune

Archeology has to deal with quite a lot of missing pieces. So any solid evidence would be highly prized. Even if this evidence pans out, it won't settle the question.

But Polynesians did it. Trust me.

(you've got mail, btw)

Not that I don't believe you, but the date of contact is about when the Polynesians started exploring, according to the study.

I'll need more evidence to accept that they started out by reaching South America and returning.

Harte

I've been looking for that since I was 19 after my first trip to Easter Island. Still haven't found it. However with DNA we might find something in a skeleton not yet recovered

Even with that, unless there is a great difference in the timeline the question of who did what still won't be answered.
But Polynesian travel would probably be the better bet then.

Harte

Somewhat of a rebuttal.
theconversation.com... tterbutton&fbclid=IwAR14_t5YmnBAdKkRqATyBnd1HubCjvkgqdWoPCFUXbVj-v-PRLxboHQBml0

Harte

originally posted by: Harte
Somewhat of a rebuttal.
theconversation.com... tterbutton&fbclid=IwAR14_t5YmnBAdKkRqATyBnd1HubCjvkgqdWoPCFUXbVj-v-PRLxboHQBml0

Harte

Yep the counter-surge begins - as it should - it'll take a couple of years to sort it all out.

Summing up: While the results presented by Ioannidis and colleagues are very interesting, to fully understand them will require a level of scholarly engagement that may take some time. Did contact between Polynesians and indigenous Americans happen? Significant evidence indicates that it did. Do these new data prove this? Perhaps, though there are a number of factors that need further investigation. Ideally, we would like to see evidence in ancient genetic samples. Engagement with the Pacific communities involved is also critical. However, if the data and analyses are correct, did the process likely occur via the arrival of indigenous Americans, on their own, on an island in eastern Polynesia? This, we argue, is highly questionable.

a reply to: Hanslune

Polynesians did it.
Trust me.

I'm not an archeologist so I can get away with saying it.

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Harte
Somewhat of a rebuttal.
theconversation.com... tterbutton&fbclid=IwAR14_t5YmnBAdKkRqATyBnd1HubCjvkgqdWoPCFUXbVj-v-PRLxboHQBml0

Harte

Yep the counter-surge begins - as it should - it'll take a couple of years to sort it all out.

Summing up: While the results presented by Ioannidis and colleagues are very interesting, to fully understand them will require a level of scholarly engagement that may take some time. Did contact between Polynesians and indigenous Americans happen? Significant evidence indicates that it did. Do these new data prove this? Perhaps, though there are a number of factors that need further investigation. Ideally, we would like to see evidence in ancient genetic samples. Engagement with the Pacific communities involved is also critical. However, if the data and analyses are correct, did the process likely occur via the arrival of indigenous Americans, on their own, on an island in eastern Polynesia? This, we argue, is highly questionable.

I'm willing to spend some time switching back and forth between the hypotheses. Before, I had to take the position that it never happened, though the sweet potato was problematic.

Tell you the truth, I'm pulling for the South Americans - just for the astonishment.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: Hanslune

originally posted by: Harte
Somewhat of a rebuttal.
theconversation.com... tterbutton&fbclid=IwAR14_t5YmnBAdKkRqATyBnd1HubCjvkgqdWoPCFUXbVj-v-PRLxboHQBml0

Harte

Yep the counter-surge begins - as it should - it'll take a couple of years to sort it all out.

Summing up: While the results presented by Ioannidis and colleagues are very interesting, to fully understand them will require a level of scholarly engagement that may take some time. Did contact between Polynesians and indigenous Americans happen? Significant evidence indicates that it did. Do these new data prove this? Perhaps, though there are a number of factors that need further investigation. Ideally, we would like to see evidence in ancient genetic samples. Engagement with the Pacific communities involved is also critical. However, if the data and analyses are correct, did the process likely occur via the arrival of indigenous Americans, on their own, on an island in eastern Polynesia? This, we argue, is highly questionable.

I'm willing to spend some time switching back and forth between the hypotheses. Before, I had to take the position that it never happened, though the sweet potato was problematic.

Tell you the truth, I'm pulling for the South Americans - just for the astonishment.

Harte

Yes, it is certainly a possibility and they were rafting around. I do like the idea the Pollies got to SA then pulled out or their later ancestors with SA blood made the voyage. However, a long term presence is hard to explain in the lack of planets other than sweet potatoes being exchanged (a few others are suggested too).

I'm sure a lot of blood, ink, reputations, egos and pixels will be spilt or spoiled due to this intellectual tussle .

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Hanslune

Polynesians did it.
Trust me.

I'm not an archeologist so I can get away with saying it.

I'm technically not one either, I stopped short of a Ph.D but I did work as one on and off....

So I too can get away with saying Polynesians did it - unless of course they didn't!