johnconley said: "The only plausible explanation for these findings is that a considerable number of transoceanic voyages in both directions across both major oceans were completed between the 7th millennium BC and the European age of discovery." I'm sorry, but that's some of the stupidest shit I've ever heard. From an academic standpoint, the mere idea of ancient Egyptian sailors visiting the western hemisphere is laughable right off the bat. Do you really believe this stuff?
I always really wonder what kind of reaction people are expecting when they send messages like this. Are my feelings supposed to be hurt? It’s not like I wrote that paper.
I don’t even have to check; the quoted sentences are from an article from the Sino-Platonic papers, related to the Warring States Project at University of Massachusetts at Amherst. The whole point of the project and the format change of the publication to open access was as a challenge to academic gatekeeping, with a focus on unconventional research.
If anyone would like to read all 273 pages of Scientific Evidence for Pre-Columbian Transoceanic Voyages to and From the Americas by John L. Sorenson and Carl L. Johanssen, you can do so.
Not sure where you’re getting the “ancient Egyptian sailors” thing from. But it’s a sad academic world indeed if saying that no one ever traveled across the Atlantic ocean in this particular 2,000+ year span, NO EXCEPTIONS EVER!!! is perfectly reasonable, but saying that it’s possible that someone may have done so since that is a massive amount of time is “laughable”.
But hey, who am I to challenge the assumptions and easily-memorized generalizations you’ve accrued in your undergrad education? I’m sure you’ll go quite far without ever questioning what you’ve learned from your textbooks, which of course could never possibly have some kind of agenda like a free tumblr blog does. ;) Yay! you win! Enjoy your life full of self-satisfaction over your extremely narrow, yet widely accepted worldview.
Not to mention “wah wah its so stupid” isn’t an argument at all.
Which I’d only really point out if it wasn’t so obvious that johnconley expects me to be very emotionally invested in their personal approval of things I post.
I’m pretty sure that part of the point of colonization in the first place was the end result that your great great grandchildren can stomp around like Godzilla yelling “COLUMBUS DISCOVERED AMERICA NO EXCEPTIONS” and receive near-universal applause for doing so, or at least an A+ in Intro to World History class. And then you get to call anyone who questions this rather questionable narrative “laughable” and “the stupidest sh*t [you’ve] ever heard”.
I mean…that’s the point of invading a continent and burning their histories, and then literally forcing the people there to rewrite their history with your approval and supervision, right? You get to control what is “acceptable” history, and what is “the stupidest sh*t [you’ve] ever heard”.
It doesn’t matter whether or not “wah wah it’s so stupid” is a real argument. You can go your whole life without ever questioning it or challenging it, and you’ll be rewarded. And if you’re white, you get the added self-esteem boost of “only white people ever did anything worth mentioning in History classes.” And actually enforce this narrative by making it illegal to teach anyone otherwise. What’s not to love?
You get to push everyone else’s history out of the way, make them electives, call them nonsense, and laugh at them. You get to marginalize other narratives.
That’s not news to me. This project is about questioning these narratives, and coming to my inbox to inform me that you learned NOT to question these narratives isn’t something I’m obligated to give a crap about. In no uncertain terms, everything about the original message says “I have already made up my mind”. My reaction is, “good for you; I’m still interested in learning something new.”
You’re right, of course, “wah wah it’s so stupid” is NOT an argument. And I don’t think it was meant to be one, either. So maybe we should all think about what it is meant to be, instead.
At the same time, you have to admit that “pre-Columbian voyages” has always been an extremely touchy subject in scholarship. Even the accepted fact of Viking settlement took considerable argument to establish in scholarship, and then only after the confirmation of archeological remains verified a written/formerly oral source.
What’s really interesting me about this study is that, if true, this would very likely mean that the proportions in the genocide of the natives of America tip (more) decisively towards colonizers actively killing them, since it would show that the introduction of Old World parasites and, probably, diseases had not resulted in the death of as many indigenous previously.
What’s also a little worrying to me from a scholarly point of view, which often worries me due to my research interests in cultural exchange, is that if this research is true it indicates a gap in the historical record which we can never satisfactorily close without the landmark discovery of an entirely new written source.
Also, can I just say that I love this paper series just for the name Sino-Platonic Papers, since I really feel like Platonism embedded in Indian philosophy and transferred into some Chinese philosophies?