benlizross wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

benlizross wrote in article :

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

benlizross wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Not That Kerry wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:04:03 -0400, Yuri Kuchinsky
wrote:

benlizross wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

benlizross wrote:

The mainland that the
Polynesians came from was Asia -- or at the very least, their sailing
technology came from there.

How so?

In actual fact, the evidence points elsewhere.

Really? Perhaps you could give some evidence in support of this amazing
claim.

There's a marked similarity between the Canadian West Coast
canoes and Polynesian canoes, for example.

Yuri.

Well maybe the Canadian West coasters came from Asia too...why fancy
that...They did!

Yes, kerry (Not That Kerry), you do seem to have a point
here...

It is indeed quite possible, and even probable, that the
Canadian West coasters came from Asia at some point in time
-- skipping along all that near-continuos coast-line --
before they went on to Polynesia, and became Polynesians!

This seems like the most rational scenario, that's also
supported by plenty of archaeological evidence.

Archaeological evidence! Great! Tell us all about it!
Uh...you don't by any chance mean pictures of totem poles, do you?

Ross Clark

For example, the same types of stone sledge-hammers, the
elbow adze, composite fish-hook, patu-type club, stone
pounders and pestles, etc.


I was going to ask you for a reference, but then I noticed that this is
just a selection from the list in Heyerdahl 1952, pp. 92ff. Ho hum.

Ross Clark

I see... So it seems like, according to Dr. Clark's system
of values,

1. Anything that Heyerdahl has ever said is automatically
wrong.

No, this is not entirely correct.

Well, now we would expect Dr. Clark to specify which of
Heyerdahl's contributions to Polynesian history may be
important.

But, I'm afraid, Dr. Clark has been remarkably short on
specifics of late...

2. Any subject upon which Heyerdahl had ever touched is
automatically tainted, and is no longer worth talking about.

No, this is completely wrong.


No doubt these assumptions do simplify Dr. Clark's Universe
considerably...

No doubt you have not misunderstood what I said quite as completely as
you pretend to. I mentioned the list from H because you posted it here
already some 4 years ago, and, judging by today's posts, I am sure you
have nothing further to add to it.

Ross Clark

Have you yet dealt with what had already been posted some 4
years ago?

I guess not... So let me help you here a bit. Here's the
goods,

[quote what had already been posted some 4 years ago]

The following info is all brought together in Heyerdahl's
AMERICAN INDIANS IN THE PACIFIC, pages 92ff.

- special similarities between NWC and NZ, noted by Capt.
Cook
- similar double canoe
- same type of rudimentary sail used both on NWC and in NZ
- the sewing of wood
- same canoes, and same techniques of canoe-making
- same canoe-decorations
- the special neolithic elbow adze: identical on NWC and in
Polynesia.
- the rectangular plank-house
- similar house facade decorations, and house-posts
- mortuary and ancestral poles
- very similar petroglyph designs
- identical pounders and pestles
- identical hand-clubs (patu clubs)
- various fishing implements, especially the halibut hook
- the earth oven
- bark-cloth manufacture

[unquote]

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku -=O=-
Toronto

But scientists, who ought to know
Assure us that it must be so.
Oh, let us never, never doubt
What nobody is sure about.
-- Hilaire Belloc