Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
Who was the 1st to discover America? |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 678910 11> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
|||||||
Sander 
AE Moderator 
Joined: 20-Mar-2007 Location: Netherlands Online Status: Offline Posts: 597 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Who was the 1st to discover America?Posted: 19-Jun-2008 at 09:50 |
|||||||
|
To Mixcoatl
Hi Mixcoatl. I dont know about wich ones you are talking, but shared complex traits in europe and china like for example : gunpowder, guns , the arch, silk, cannons, bronze , chariots, automobiles , paper and so many more are the result of (multi -directional ) cultural diffusion. Do we agree on this?
Well, why assuming that complex inventions occur repeatedly without diffusion when its not even demonstrated ?
Lets be clear : The 'cultural evolution' school developed the theory that complex inventions can duplicate itself (without diffusion) in separate societies without demonstrating it. Lets experiment empirically and see for ourself if 2 people can invent a really complex trait ( like a script ) without some diffusion involved in the process. Do you happen to know of any succesfull empirical experiments?
Of course, we may also ask for demonstrations that theprocess of diffusion works and leads to spread of complex traits. Well, i think we all know that - in contrast to 'cultural evolution' - we can easily demonstrate this. Not that its even needed ; it demonstrates itself al the time. Not strange for a real process.
"One of the most damaging lines of attack on evolutionary theories was the demonstration of the importance of diffusion in culture history. Ideas, customs, technologies, etc., constantly spread from one people to another . .. contacts between groups of different cultures have been one of the chief stimuli to culture growth and change, rather than invention, some "law" of social evolution ...." (Professor Irwin Hallowell )
 To Pinguin
Nobody pretends it. You show yourself you know and understand too little of the cultural development theories, the concepts and studies for a normal talk.
 Patents protect the innovation from getting copied without permission of the innovator. Good example of how important the role of diffusion is .Socalled parellel inventions in modern times usually dont fall under the concept of indepent parallel inventions at all. They are developed in the same society or in different socities that are in contact with each other and share bodies of knowledge due to diffusion. So transcultural diffusion stands at the basis.
You do more harm than good to the isolationist case.
 Edited by Sander - 24-Jun-2008 at 13:04 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
Jams
Consul 
Suspended Joined: 06-Sep-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 365 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jun-2008 at 12:48 |
|||||||
Interesting that you should write that. It is as if you think argumenting techniques is the important issue here, rather than the scientific truth. It is always possible to interpret peoples words in a way that can be used in a "counter-argument". Are you really interested in the truth, or are you just trying to defend you own ideas, no matter what?
These inventions are parallel, perhaps, and although SIMILAR, they're not identical.
Those "similarity" arguments just isn't scientific, they amount to nothing, unless real archiological evidence is found that proves a connection. I don't say that there is none, but on the other hand Pinguins list does not prove anything. In fact, assuming that Native Americans had contact with EACH OTHER, how come all those inventions did not "diffuse" all over the Americas?
In other words, parallel or not, they're not a true evidence of anything.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest 
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jun-2008 at 17:23 |
|||||||
You may know quite a bit about theories developed on thin air in Europe. I am afraid, though, you are absolutely ignorant about the development of civilization in the Americas. So, you are just playing with theories that aren't in touch with reality.
Jumping to conclusions, once more. Just study patent records and you'll find out that parallel inventions are frequent.
Don't hide your head under the ground like an ostrich, please. Besides, your rethorical "salsa" don't impress me.
Edited by pinguin - 19-Jun-2008 at 17:48 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jun-2008 at 17:25 |
|||||||
Given the fact the Americas were isolated from the rest of the world during most its history (until proven otherwise), those are evidence of parallel inventions.
Cotton textiles were invented in both the Americas and India, for instance. In the Americas was first. Interesting, isn't?
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Jun-2008 at 18:06 |
|||||||
The example is a little bit more complex. First, China was never fully isolated from the West but only partially. The West and China were connected indirectly through the Silk Road. Inventions and ideas passed back and forth from China to Central Asia and from there to the West.
Gunpowder was a Chinese invention that spread to the West. Silks it is not as easy, because Greeks had some varieties of silk! Abacos were invented in parallel in Rome and China. The arch, the codex and other inventions probably spread from the West to China.
However, there are many developments in parallel as well. Pithagoras theorem was proven in China and the West about the same time, for instance.
In short, better that applying plastic theories to historical events, we should study the events and extract from them the theories. Both parallel inventions and external influences happens all the time.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Sander
AE Moderator
Joined: 20-Mar-2007 Location: Netherlands Online Status: Offline Posts: 597 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Jun-2008 at 04:32 |
|||||||
|
'All complex cultural parallels are examples of diffusion unless proven otherwise 'sounds far more realistic.
The Pinguin speaks of birds ?
Many complex inventions /innovations do not recieve patents. Some persons ( not too many I hope) might think this is automatically evidence they are the same as something else (without any underlying diffusion). Nonsense. Patents are refused for many reasons ( like low industrial value ). Most important, when some elements of the invention were already existing in certain 'products/ ideas' and therefore known to the inventor and utilized by him , then it are these elements that are similar ( for the mentioned reasons)and therefore refused patents. A case of diffusing wich should be prevented . As said before, preventing diffusing is the goal of patents.
What Is a Patent?
A patent for an invention is the grant of a property right to the inventor, issued by the Patent and Trademark Office. The term of a new patent is 20 years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States or, in special cases, from the date an earlier related application was filed, subject to the payment of maintenance fees. US patent grants are effective only within the US, US territories, and US possessions.
The right conferred by the patent grant is, in the language of the statute and of the grant itself, "the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling" the invention in the United States or "importing" the invention into the United States. What is granted is not the right to make, use, offer for sale, sell or import, but the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the invention.
( See the United States Patent and Trademark Office )
The many listed shared items already widely accepted as the result of difusion , do not support the idea that the rest are exceptions. Occams merciless razor ( not that its needed ) makes meatloaf of such proposals.
The isolationist school is full of paradoxes. Its not based on the general process but tries to build a case on what ( they hope) are exceptions to it ! They agree that intercontinental diffusion was the most common process and resulted in the spread of ancient complex traits but when it comes to the indians, they are supposed to be free of the process, the only exception on earth! Indeed, a case of ' exceptionalism' .
Next time, some interesting shared item ( often overlooked ) .
Edited by Sander - 24-Jun-2008 at 17:40 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jun-2008 at 01:51 |
|||||||
That's the more illogical induction I have seen in years.
Well, it is precisely Occams razon which cut in pieces the pseudo-historical fantasies that pretend to show contact were there wasn't any
Which isolationist school? Americanists know there was diffusion of ideas "BETWEEN THE AMERICAS". And example is the diffusion of maize agriculture. Americanists also know there is no single EVIDENCE of contact by people of the Old World (except Inuits and norse). In fact, there is a lot more evidence of Americans reaching Europe than people of the Old World reaching here.
It is so funny that you claim the help of logic and reason for a cause so irrational as hyperdiffusionism. What comes next? That Tiahuanaco was the Atlantis?
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Tyranos
Shogun 
Joined: 01-Oct-2007 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 246 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jun-2008 at 08:39 |
|||||||
|
The Norse would've been in contact with Eskimos from an early date, and they also coast hugged the shores that's how they ended in Iceland, Greenland and possible some parts of Canada.
1st to Discover America as in Explorer, is still Columbo, it was cause of him all the europeans went there--and no one else but him. Possible Egyptian and Greco-Roman contact has been brought up with strong likelyhood, however controversial. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jun-2008 at 15:29 |
|||||||
Well, some claim that pre-eskimos peoples reached Europe long time before Norse started theirs trips...
Agreed
It is more likely phoenicians had tried that rather than egyptians, who weren't precisely outstanding sailors. However, no matter how they have tried, there is not scientific evidence of people of the ancient mediterranean reaching the Americas.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Vorian
Colonel 
Joined: 06-Dec-2007 Location: Greece/Hellas Online Status: Offline Posts: 566 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jun-2008 at 17:45 |
|||||||
Funny I thought that was only you (just kidding) |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Sander
AE Moderator
Joined: 20-Mar-2007 Location: Netherlands Online Status: Offline Posts: 597 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2008 at 01:30 |
|||||||
Switching to Atlantis? As if we dont see you cannot discuss cultural development processes
.In the isolationism --diffusionism discussions, diffusion within the americas is commonly termed inter -american diffusion , not inter-continental diffusion. Surely they know that the spread of complex items is due to diffusion. As long as they did'nt come from outside the americas , they dont have problems accepting it.
Most of the ancient complex parelles are indeed much earlier attested in the Old World. Writing for example was already present in 3 continents for > 1000 years before it diffused to the Americas, per diffusionism. So accepting diffusion of the ancient cultural parellels implies that most of them diffused to the Indians, instead of from them. This might be uncomfortable for some in the beginning but it does not make them less than others or something.
Since you bring it up yourself; we surely remember that Inuit thread where you claimed : a 19 th century kayak in a museum to be a precolumbian one; a germanic to be an inuit or indian; and how the sail was present in the Americas for 8000 years (while admitting you had no evidence for it) , not to mention other distortions.
Edited by Sander - 27-Jun-2008 at 16:15 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Bernard Woolley
Pretorian 
Joined: 11-Jun-2008 Location: Canada Online Status: Offline Posts: 154 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2008 at 02:46 |
|||||||
I'm sorry, but are you suggesting that writing was imported into the Americas? Diffusion has happened wherever it was possible, I agree, but not all vaguely similar ideas from every corner of the earth are necessarily related to each other. Besides, Native American writing systems were so idiomatic that it's hard to see how they could be related to any Old World forms. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2008 at 04:13 |
|||||||
It is not only me. Columbus also believed it
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2008 at 04:27 |
|||||||
Not me. I expected you do.
Of course, we don't have problems accepting inter-american diffusion as you preffer to call it
Don't tell me Santa Claus brought writing to the Americas riding a flying slade lead by Ruddolf
That's a very weak reasoning. Experts know that the alphabet was invented once and diffused from the Middle East. However scripts weren't invented once but several times in parallel. China, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Easter Island and probably India invented writing scripts independently. Even more, systems of symbols precede writing and are almost universal. Before putting ahead just another wild theory, go to the library please.
With respect to the Americas, the only people that had writing were the Mesoamericans, and the most advanced scripts were the Olmecs-Maya line. The rest lacked writing. If you look at the map, there are other people closer to the outside world rather than the people of Yucatan or Mesoamerica, Caribbeans, North Americans or South Americans are more likely candidates for contacts. So, your theory that writing was imported lacks support.
Follow the thread. You will find my opinions there. With respect to textiles and sails, you will have to visit one our museums and you'll find out things that at the present you don't know.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jun-2008 at 04:29 |
|||||||
Absolutely.
Fortunately, Maya writing was cracked and now we can read it. With that knowledge many of the wild fantasies about the origin of mayan civilization have been destroyed.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Sander
AE Moderator
Joined: 20-Mar-2007 Location: Netherlands Online Status: Offline Posts: 597 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jun-2008 at 02:28 |
|||||||
The comment in my posting went beyond it. It refered to what diffusionism in the discussed context implies ( small edit) and also what it would mean for the ' isolationists if they would accept diffusion without a sort of double standard. In short , per diffusionism , the concept of writing and many other complex traits diffused to the Americas from outside.
Edited by Sander - 28-Jun-2008 at 02:33 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Bernard Woolley
Pretorian
Joined: 11-Jun-2008 Location: Canada Online Status: Offline Posts: 154 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jun-2008 at 03:06 |
|||||||
You've lost me. Diffusion isn't a dogma - you can accept that it happened in some situations without insisting that it happened in all situations. I can posit that my mother gave birth to my siblings and I while acknowledging that she didn't give birth to everybody else.
Some things are clearly related to other things, some things are clearly not, and others leave room for debate. Pre-Colombian American writing is clearly not related to any other script, and it would be practically impossible to construct a scenario for its importation that doesn't conflict with known facts.
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Sander
AE Moderator
Joined: 20-Mar-2007 Location: Netherlands Online Status: Offline Posts: 597 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jun-2008 at 03:44 |
|||||||
Same clownish comments with the strawman touch. Try something new.
The only one who demonstrates he needs to read some good stuff here is you. Otherwise you would have known that the Indus script aint considered a true script c.q. writing since many years (Witzel , Sproat and Farmer 2004) .. Unbelievable
Some scholars think there might have been more than one script invented in Eurasia but many specialized scholars ( DeFrancis 1989 to name a book refering to this issue ) stress only one ( ultimate ) ancestor. But, this controversy and ofcourse the studies dealing with it must be (of course ) completely unknown to you too .
Including the Easter islands script in the list is one of your biggest bloopers.
We dont even know it its writing or some mnemonic system etc. It wellknwown they were exposed to the latin alphabet in the 1770s so its generally regarded ( even by most Oceanic scholars ) as the result of stimulus-diffusion. One of those examples of how the concept of writing can diffuse without leaving (m)any graphic traces in its 'descendants'. Good example of diffusion again.
 Now, these and other cases give extra support to the idea that the Olmec script could have come from virtually any older Old world script by idea- diffusion without leaving traces. Interesting
Steve Farmer, Richard Sproat, and Michael Witzel, "The Collapse of the Indus-Script Thesis: The Myth of a Literate Harappan Civilization", EVJS, vol. 11 (2004), issue 2 (Dec)
John DeFrancis (1989 ) The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems, University of Hawaii Press Edited by Sander - 04-Jul-2008 at 14:19 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
red clay
Administrator 
Tomato Master Emeritus Joined: 14-Jan-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 10226 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jun-2008 at 04:22 |
|||||||
|
what it would mean for the ' isolationists if they would accept diffusion without a sort of double standard. In short , per diffusionism , the concept of writing and many other complex traits diffused to the Americas from outside.
I know one isolationist for whom it would mean severe colonic spasms, gastric and cerebral distress, compounded by hangnail.
 I admit I am a diffusionist. I'm a little bit different than many however, in as much as I believe there is a definite bias against ancient indigenous Americans.
Why for instance is it that complex concepts were diffused to and not from the Americas. We have cultures as ancient as any and more complex than most. We know so little about the oldest of our cultures, some having sculpture depicting animals that went extinct 12,000 years ago, How can you say writing didn't diffuse from here.
And while we are in that neck of the woods, why is it that the immigrations went one way.
Oh, I forgot, the poor unsophisticated, ignorant and unimaginative Native Americans couldn't build ocean going ships. They could build cities that rivaled and in some instances surpassed any found in Europe but they couldn't build ships?
 They had command of advanced math, physics and hydraulics with which they constructed irrigation and canal systems which stood unequaled for 2,000 years, until the Romans. They had an incredibly advanced knowledge of astronomy. But they couldn't navigate? Get a grip.
Giving even a conservative dating to sites such as tiahuanco, [which is several thousand years older than the highly questionable " official statement" from the local governments in the Andes.] puts up major problems upon careful examination of such sites. The most notable is the unmistakable and incontrovertible evidence of a level of technology unlike any other civilization in prehistory now known.
|
||||||||
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown. |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jun-2008 at 04:24 |
|||||||
Clownish comments' You inspire me
Ha ha ha....
So what? Please define me what is a script. I have the impression you have no idea what is and what is not.
Some other schollars, called theologists, believed there was once a single language that split in many when the Tower of Babel was built.
In other words: you have schollars for anyrhing. Look for the wildest theory... and you will find a schollar deffending it
I see. It looks like hyperdifussionist is your religion. Too bad, because dogma stop you to make fair judgement of facts.
Anyways. It is true that the concept of writing was probably discovered by Easter people by looking at Spanish writers. What it is also true is that they developed theirs own scripts.
You are wrong when you believe there is a SINGLE easter island script; there are many. A couple of Rongo-Rongo tablets are well known and theirs meaning is not hidden anymore. The full script haven't been broken, though.
Yeap. According to certain racist ideas, Olmecs weren't intelligent enough to invent a script by themselves.
Inventing signs are a part of human nature as much as speak. Nobody invented speaking and nobody invented signs. Scripts are just organized systems of signs, so the invention of writing is not such a wonderful thing as you pretend, but actually something that flows naturally.
Some schollars, for instance, say Incas lacked writing. But that's because they define writing as a mean of putting signs in flat surfaces. Incas had systems to codify information in cords, though, that worked pretty much as writing. They also were master textile weavers that handled hundreds of signs on theirs works. If you don't know, you can read a message reading symbols with relative easy. As a freemason and you'll find out.
Well, those systems of symbols exist all over the world in people that lacked a standarized scripts, but that could get one when they need.
Perhaps is time to ask schollars to study harder.
So? What do they mean by a script?
It is so funny there are still schollars that believe in the myth of the Land of Eden: a single place from where mankind, speach and writing spread. It is so naive, and so insulting to the intelligence of the different human groups.
Edited by pinguin - 28-Jun-2008 at 04:30 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 678910 11> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.
