settlement of Polynesia (was: techniques of denial
Yuri Kuchinsky
: Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
:> In the real world, under normal conditions of ocean navigation, lots of
:> boats get blown off course and end up whereever the wind and waves carry
:> them.
: Before you go into your usual rant, let's pause and go over the logic.
: Did I say "Drift voyages never happen"?. Look carefully. See? I did not.
: In fact I just spent some time discussing drift voyages, and their
: strong east-to-west tendency. Now, to get from that to "So this is how
: Polynesia was settled -- from America.", you need one more crucial
: premise -- "Polynesia was settled *entirely* by drift voyages". And for
: that you have no evidence.
: Now you go ahead and rant:
:> But that's in the real world, as opposed to the academic world
:> where make-believe super-mariners always control the elements, and not
:> otherwise.
: Feel better now?
Ross,
We know there was plenty of S American coastal voyaging for thousands of
years before Polynesia was settled. We know also that, under normal
conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
Regards,
Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku
Reality is that which, when you stop believing
in it, doesn't go away -=O=- Philip K. Dick
Yuri Kuchinsky
: On 29 Feb 2000 18:33:21 GMT, Yuri Kuchinsky <yu...@clio.trends.ca>
: wrote:
:>We know there was plenty of S American coastal voyaging for thousands of
:>years before Polynesia was settled. We know also that, under normal
:>conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
:>end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
:>
:>So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
:>must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
:>blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
:>
: Levinson Ward and Webb, which you have clearly not yet read, concluded
: that all of them either get blown north up the south american coast
: until they are brought back in again, or their crews expire at sea.
: Quite unusually for them, they did not say there was a low, or very
: low, probability of boats or rafts drifting to polynesia from south
: america. They said, quite specifically "From this area there appears
: to be ZERO probability of rafts drifting to Polynesia". The capitals
: are mine.
I guess you have now "proved" that Heyerdahl has never sailed the
Kon-Tiki, Eric?
Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku
"Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so, it might be, and
if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!"
-- Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking Glass"
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>benlizross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>: Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
>
>:> In the real world, under normal conditions of ocean navigation, lots of
>:> boats get blown off course and end up whereever the wind and waves carry
>:> them.
>
>: Before you go into your usual rant, let's pause and go over the logic.
>: Did I say "Drift voyages never happen"?. Look carefully. See? I did not.
>: In fact I just spent some time discussing drift voyages, and their
>: strong east-to-west tendency. Now, to get from that to "So this is how
>: Polynesia was settled -- from America.", you need one more crucial
>: premise -- "Polynesia was settled *entirely* by drift voyages". And for
>: that you have no evidence.
>
>: Now you go ahead and rant:
>
>:> But that's in the real world, as opposed to the academic world
>:> where make-believe super-mariners always control the elements, and not
>:> otherwise.
>
>: Feel better now?
>
>Ross,
>
>We know there was plenty of S American coastal voyaging for thousands of
>years before Polynesia was settled. We know also that, under normal
>conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
>end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
>
>So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
>must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
>blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
>
Levinson Ward and Webb, which you have clearly not yet read, concluded
that all of them either get blown north up the south american coast
until they are brought back in again, or their crews expire at sea.
Quite unusually for them, they did not say there was a low, or very
low, probability of boats or rafts drifting to polynesia from south
america. They said, quite specifically "From this area there appears
to be ZERO probability of rafts drifting to Polynesia". The capitals
are mine.
Eric Stevens
There are two classes of people. Those who divide people into
two classes, and those who don't. I belong to the second class.
benlizross
>
> benlizross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> : Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
>
> :> In the real world, under normal conditions of ocean navigation, lots of
> :> boats get blown off course and end up whereever the wind and waves carry
> :> them.
>
> : Before you go into your usual rant, let's pause and go over the logic.
> : Did I say "Drift voyages never happen"?. Look carefully. See? I did not.
> : In fact I just spent some time discussing drift voyages, and their
> : strong east-to-west tendency. Now, to get from that to "So this is how
> : Polynesia was settled -- from America.", you need one more crucial
> : premise -- "Polynesia was settled *entirely* by drift voyages". And for
> : that you have no evidence.
>
> : Now you go ahead and rant:
>
> :> But that's in the real world, as opposed to the academic world
> :> where make-believe super-mariners always control the elements, and not
> :> otherwise.
>
> : Feel better now?
>
> Ross,
>
> We know there was plenty of S American coastal voyaging for thousands of
> years before Polynesia was settled.
No we don't, Yuri.
We know also that, under normal
> conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
> end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
And most of the people in them die.
> So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
> must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
> blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
See above.
Ross Clark
gblack
"benlizross" <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:38BC20...@ihug.co.nz...
> > So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
> > must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
> > blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
>
> See above.
>
> Ross Clark
beofre his 'voyage' could begin :-)))
Larry Elmore
news:95188316...@ham.ihug.co.nz...
Well, in Heyerdahl's case, it was because none of them had any idea how to
sail a balsa. While they did learn to control it well enough to sail almost
at right angles to the wind, they didn't discover how to adjust the guaras
and sail in conjunction so as to be able to sail into the wind and maneuver
like a regular sailing vessel. Those techniques weren't rediscovered until
several years after Kon Tiki.
Personally, I seriously doubt that thousands of balsas ended up being
carried away into the far Pacific. Maybe a few dozen to a few hundred over a
period of several hundred years. I expect the crews of the majority of them
met their end of dehydration at sea. How many may have been lost depends on
how many balsas were actively fishing or trading, and there's just not
enough evidence to put a number on that for any period of time, except
perhaps during the early years of the Spanish incursion. Unfortunately, the
Spanish appeared to have payed little attention to this subject, being
almost entirely focused on the wealth of the Incas in the Andes.
Larry
Yuri Kuchinsky
:> : Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
:>
:> :> In the real world, under normal conditions of ocean navigation, lots of
:> :> boats get blown off course and end up whereever the wind and waves carry
:> :> them.
:>
:> : Before you go into your usual rant, let's pause and go over the logic.
:> : Did I say "Drift voyages never happen"?. Look carefully. See? I did not.
:> : In fact I just spent some time discussing drift voyages, and their
:> : strong east-to-west tendency. Now, to get from that to "So this is how
:> : Polynesia was settled -- from America.", you need one more crucial
:> : premise -- "Polynesia was settled *entirely* by drift voyages". And for
:> : that you have no evidence.
:>
:> : Now you go ahead and rant:
:>
:> :> But that's in the real world, as opposed to the academic world
:> :> where make-believe super-mariners always control the elements, and not
:> :> otherwise.
:>
:> : Feel better now?
:>
:> Ross,
:>
:> We know there was plenty of S American coastal voyaging for thousands of
:> years before Polynesia was settled.
: No we don't, Yuri.
Denial, anyone?
: We know also that, under normal
:> conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
:> end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
: And most of the people in them die.
And some live.
:> So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
:> must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
:> blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
They all vanished into the academic fantasy land?
Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku
You will remember, Watson, how the dreadful business of the Abernetty
family was first brought to my notice by the depth to which the parsley
had sunk into the butter upon a hot day? -=O=- Sherlock Holmes
Yuri Kuchinsky
: "gblack" <gbl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
: news:95188316...@ham.ihug.co.nz...
:>
:> "benlizross" <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
:> news:38BC20...@ihug.co.nz...
:> > > must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
:> > > blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
:> > See above.
:> >
:> > Ross Clark
:> Which is why heyerdahls Kon Tiki had to be towed out into the ocean
: current
:> beofre his 'voyage' could begin :-)))
: Well, in Heyerdahl's case, it was because none of them had any idea how to
: sail a balsa. While they did learn to control it well enough to sail almost
: at right angles to the wind, they didn't discover how to adjust the guaras
: and sail in conjunction so as to be able to sail into the wind and maneuver
: like a regular sailing vessel. Those techniques weren't rediscovered until
: several years after Kon Tiki.
: Personally, I seriously doubt that thousands of balsas ended up being
: carried away into the far Pacific. Maybe a few dozen to a few hundred over a
: period of several hundred years. I expect the crews of the majority of them
: met their end of dehydration at sea. How many may have been lost depends on
: how many balsas were actively fishing or trading, and there's just not
: enough evidence to put a number on that for any period of time, except
: perhaps during the early years of the Spanish incursion. Unfortunately, the
: Spanish appeared to have payed little attention to this subject, being
: almost entirely focused on the wealth of the Incas in the Andes.
In this case, it's not the precise numbers that matter, Larry, but the
principle. Soon perhaps Ross will be again trying to persuade us that
all those rudders (guaras) are really shovels?
Cheers,
Larry Elmore
>
> "Larry Elmore" <ljel...@montana.campuscw.net> wrote in message
> news:89ipsj$r0l$1...@news.campuscwix.net...
> sea going peoples.
> The Polynesian and the English here in New Zealand.
> Its an ugly bit of silverware but its got a space on the mantlepiece.
> We retained the 'Americas cup'
Congratulations!
Larry
Ross CLark
Knowing you, Yuri, you are probably using "denial" in its currently fashionable
pop-psychology sense. Pseudo-psychologizing is one of your favourite devices for
denigrating your opponents.
However, there is another, older sense of the word "denial". It's a verbal noun
from the word "deny", which means to say that something is not true. So here's how
it works:
Yuri says (something untrue)
Ross says "That's not true" -- this is a denial. I am not "in denial", I am
denying what you say.
However, in this particular instance I have been feeling a bit bad about denying
what you said so absolutely. At first I thought you were trying to project your
16th century sailing balsas into the remote past, for which you have no evidence.
But if you mean people living on the coast, catching fish, hence having some sort
of water craft, OK.
> : We know also that, under normal
> :> conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
> :> end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
>
> : And most of the people in them die.
>
> And some live.
Neither you nor I have any serious numbers to go on here, but I would suggest that
the rate of survival would be very low where the nearest likely landfall is about
3 months away.
> > So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
> :> must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
> :> blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
>
> They all vanished into the academic fantasy land?
I don't know, Yuri, you'll have to look there yourself, since "academic fantasy
land" seems to be centred in your own head. It's not a place I'm familiar with.
Now what you are trying to say is that you are quite sure that over the years at
least some people from the Americas must have been blown away and survived long
enough to land on some Polynesian island. Sure, it's possible, why not? So what
do you conclude from that?
Ross Clark
gblack
Cliff Sayr
>principle. Soon perhaps Ross will be again trying to persuade us that
>all those rudders (guaras) are really shovels?
If there were so many numbers either sailing with deliberation on purposeful
voyages or getting blown to Polynesia, why didn't some wind up settling on the
Juan Fernandez Islands much closer to the Chilean coast ?
Clifford Sayre in Silver Spring, MD
Yuri Kuchinsky
:>In this case, it's not the precise numbers that matter, Larry, but the
Because it's not suitable for settling?
Are you aware of all that Native American pottery on Galapagos, Cliff?
Yuri Kuchinsky
It's good to see some (tentative) accomodation to reality on Ross'
part...
:> : We know also that, under normal
:> :> conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
:> :> end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
:>
:> : And most of the people in them die.
:>
:> And some live.
: Neither you nor I have any serious numbers to go on here, but I would suggest that
: the rate of survival would be very low where the nearest likely landfall is about
: 3 months away.
You really want them to die ASAP, don't you?
But I suppose Polynesians going for 3 months against the wind and
current cannot die. And they went for 3 months against the wind because
they knew PSYCHICALLY that there MUST be an island there in the middle
of the ocean! Right?
:> > So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
:> :> must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
:> :> blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
:>
:> They all vanished into the academic fantasy land?
: I don't know, Yuri, you'll have to look there yourself, since "academic fantasy
: land" seems to be centred in your own head. It's not a place I'm familiar with.
: Now what you are trying to say is that you are quite sure that over the years at
: least some people from the Americas must have been blown away and survived long
: enough to land on some Polynesian island. Sure, it's possible, why not? So what
: do you conclude from that?
Cultural contact.
Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Doug Weller
> You really want them to die ASAP, don't you?
>
sure which technique it is, but I'm sure Yuri can get a lot of mileage
from it.
Keep 'em coming, Yuri.
Doug Weller, founder member, Yuri appreciation society
--
Doug Weller member of moderation panel sci.archaeology.moderated
Submissions to: sci-archaeol...@medieval.org
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk
Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details
Anthony West
>Ross CLark <r.c...@auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>: Now what you are trying to say is that you are quite sure that over the
years at
>: least some people from the Americas must have been blown away and
survived long
>: enough to land on some Polynesian island. Sure, it's possible, why not?
So what
>: do you conclude from that?
>
>Cultural contact.
A recurrent theme of Yuri's. And one that has never made
much sense at all.
In ordinary life, storm-tossed, long-lost mariners who are
lucky enough to make it to an inhabited island DON'T
influence the local culture. They're in rags, they don't
speak the language, they have nothing anybody wants.
If they're lucky, they marry into the population and are
absorbed, leaving genetic -- but not cultural -- traces.
Cf. the two Italian shipwrecked sailors who were washed
ashore on Tristan da Cunha a century ago. Today, two of
the seven surnames on Tristan are Italian. But the
islanders are Protestant, not Catholic; they eat potatoes,
not pasta; they speak English, not Italian.
That's all that would have happened to the handful of
South Americans that might have survived a long
accidental crossing to the west.
Tony West
Philadelphia aaw...@critpath.org
benlizross
>
> :> : We know also that, under normal
> :> :> conditions of ocean navigation, lots of boats get blown off course and
> :> :> end up whereever the wind and waves carry them.
> :>
> :> : And most of the people in them die.
> :>
> :> And some live.
>
> : Neither you nor I have any serious numbers to go on here, but I would suggest that
> : the rate of survival would be very low where the nearest likely landfall is about
> : 3 months away.
>
Aren't we trying to be realistic?
> But I suppose Polynesians going for 3 months against the wind and
> current cannot die. And they went for 3 months against the wind because
> they knew PSYCHICALLY that there MUST be an island there in the middle
> of the ocean! Right?
As I've pointed out before, Yuri, the "fantasy land" you keep talking
about is entirely in your own head. Who (besides you) is talking about
Polynesians sailing for 3 months against wind and current?
> :> > So please tell me, Ross, what do you think must have happened to what
> :> :> must have been hundreds and thousands of S American vessels that were
> :> :> blown off course and carried west into the Pacific from SA?
> :>
> :> They all vanished into the academic fantasy land?
>
> : I don't know, Yuri, you'll have to look there yourself, since "academic fantasy
> : land" seems to be centred in your own head. It's not a place I'm familiar with.
>
> : Now what you are trying to say is that you are quite sure that over the years at
> : least some people from the Americas must have been blown away and survived long
> : enough to land on some Polynesian island. Sure, it's possible, why not? So what
> : do you conclude from that?
>
> Cultural contact.
Well, maybe, assuming that there was already somebody there to contact,
and that the contact didn't consist of being whacked on the head and
eaten. You're not going back to your fantasy-land idea that mainstream
scholars absolutely deny all possibility of contact, are you?
But the way this whole question came up is that you were claiming this
type of drift voyage was the *only* way that Polynesia got settled. Are
you still of this opinion?
Ross Clark
benlizross
>
> Cliff Sayr <clif...@aol.com> wrote:
> :>In this case, it's not the precise numbers that matter, Larry, but the
> :>principle. Soon perhaps Ross will be again trying to persuade us that
> :>all those rudders (guaras) are really shovels?
>
> : If there were so many numbers either sailing with deliberation on purposeful
> : voyages or getting blown to Polynesia, why didn't some wind up settling on the
> : Juan Fernandez Islands much closer to the Chilean coast ?
>
> Because it's not suitable for settling?
Nonsense. There's a population of several hundred there now, and people
have lived there off and on since the 17th century. (Remember Alexander
Selkirk?) There are plenty of *far* less hospitable islands in the
Pacific that support human populations.
Ross Clark
Yuri Kuchinsky
: Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
:> But I suppose Polynesians going for 3 months against the wind and
:> current cannot die. And they went for 3 months against the wind because
:> they knew PSYCHICALLY that there MUST be an island there in the middle
:> of the ocean! Right?
: As I've pointed out before, Yuri, the "fantasy land" you keep talking
: about is entirely in your own head. Who (besides you) is talking about
: Polynesians sailing for 3 months against wind and current?
So according to you it's easier to sail to EI from the West?
Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful
tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor
less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean
so many different things."
-- Lewis Carrol, "Through the Looking Glass"
benlizross
>
> benlizross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> : Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
>
> :> But I suppose Polynesians going for 3 months against the wind and
> :> current cannot die. And they went for 3 months against the wind because
> :> they knew PSYCHICALLY that there MUST be an island there in the middle
> :> of the ocean! Right?
>
> : As I've pointed out before, Yuri, the "fantasy land" you keep talking
> : about is entirely in your own head. Who (besides you) is talking about
> : Polynesians sailing for 3 months against wind and current?
[Answer: Nobody]
> So according to you it's easier to sail to EI from the West?
Actually it's easier to sail almost *anywhere* than to drift, in the
sense that you are more likely to survive. I can post a reference on
likely sailing routes to EI if you're interested.
Ross Clark
gblack
> Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
> >
> > benlizross <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> > : Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
> >
> > :> But I suppose Polynesians going for 3 months against the wind and
> > :> current cannot die. And they went for 3 months against the wind
because
> > :> they knew PSYCHICALLY that there MUST be an island there in the
middle
> > :> of the ocean! Right?
> >
> > : As I've pointed out before, Yuri, the "fantasy land" you keep talking
> > : about is entirely in your own head. Who (besides you) is talking about
> > : Polynesians sailing for 3 months against wind and current?
>
> [Answer: Nobody]
Perhaps at this stage it would be fair to point out that Hawaiki Nui sailed
(with traditional navigation methods) from Raiatea to Rarotonga and then to
Tahua Island by Great Barrier Island in 65 days back in 1985.
So it would seem that once more Yuri is wrong.