Article View: sci.archaeology
Article #888Re: genetic facts [was: Ashby, botanical facts
From: Peter van Rossum
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 00:00
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 00:00
46 lines
3025 bytes
3025 bytes
While I'm currently busy doing research I think is useful rather than dealing with the ramblings of an lay-researcher who knows next to nothing about archaeology, it was brought to my attention that this clown has once again tried to claim said something they didn't say. In this caseMr. Kuchinsky has misquoted me (a common tactic of his) so I figured I'd clear his misinterpretation up. In article <70t05s$rn9$1@whisper.globalserve.net> yuku@globalserve.net (Yuri Kuchinsky) writes: >: >It is clear to Peter van Rossum, who is certainly no fan of Heyerdahl, >: >that Cann and other's work provides support for Heyerdahl. Yuri, you're pathetic, I said no such thing. In that post I said that: "*Cann* has hypothesized that her genetic analyses are more consistent with a direct Polynesia/South American contact hypothesis, " Get it, Cann et al. think their data support Heyerdahl, other biological anthropologists dispute them. I did *not* say they're data support Heyerdahl, I said that they think their data support direct contact. I also pointed out that the same article: "In response to criticisms Cann&Lum (1996) state, 'we think it wiser to admit that the hypothesis of direct contact [between Polynesia and South America] has not been adequately tested.' At which point *I* concluded, "If even they [Cann & Lum] are only tentative in their conclusions I think it best if we reserve judgement." Again, even Cann & Lum didn't consider their hypothesis as sufficiently tested to conclusively accept it. Other biological anthropologists don't agree with their conclusions, therefore I see the matter as very far from settled. Maybe in the future Mr. Kuchinsky could refrain from mischaracterizing what other people said? I doubt it. The only suggestion I have is that readers of this ng. be very skeptical when Yuri claims anyone has said anything. Mr. Kuchinsky has regularly mischaracterized the statements of other people, myself included. Now I'll get back to my dissertation. Peter van Rossum
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<pmv100.82.00220C8D@psu.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<p-ashby-2310981728340001@mac120.nimr.mrc.ac.uk> <70qg8i$nsa$1@whisper.globalserve.net> <363119df.4775821@news.csuohio.edu> <70t05s$rn9$1@whisper.globalserve.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f66d0,df6f216fbb8c3d89 X-Google-Attributes: gidf66d0,public X-Google-Thread: 10065c,4a599aa9a3239f6e X-Google-Attributes: gid10065c,public X-Google-Thread: fcea6,4a599aa9a3239f6e X-Google-Attributes: gidfcea6,public X-Google-Thread: 1129f3,716126af31e790df X-Google-Attributes: gid1129f3,public X-Google-Thread: 1119a6,4a599aa9a3239f6e X-Google-Attributes: gid1119a6,public From: pmv100@psu.edu (Peter van Rossum) Subject: Re: genetic facts [was: Ashby, botanical facts Date: 1998/10/26 Message-ID: <pmv100.82.00220C8D@psu.edu> X-Deja-AN: 405981237 References: <p-ashby-2310981728340001@mac120.nimr.mrc.ac.uk> <70qg8i$nsa$1@whisper.globalserve.net> <363119df.4775821@news.csuohio.edu> <70t05s$rn9$1@whisper.globalserve.net> X-Authinfo-User: pmv100@psu.edu Organization: CAC Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,bionet.general,sci.misc,sci.bio.misc,sci.anthropology