Re: botanical facts (was: Lapita and Polynesian origins Author: Yuri Kuchinsky Date: 1998/09/22 Forums: sci.archaeology, soc.culture.new-zealand _________________________________________________________________ Wade Workman (email@example.com) wrote: : Yuri Kuchinsky wrote in message <firstname.lastname@example.org>... [Wade:] > >: Ever considered that the next stop after Rapa Nui for > >: the eastward voyaging Polynesians was South America? > > > >Yes, I have, and I consider this pretty unlikely. So who else offered this > >theory in print? Or are you making these things up? > > Irwin, Geoffrey. (1992). _The prehistoric exploration and colonization of > the Pacific._ Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. > > Although I do not necessarily agree with mechanics of Irwin's > navigation theory, I do believe he makes a convincing case (based on > real physical evidence I made add) for the Polynesians having the > skill, knowledge, and opportunity for landing in South America. Wade, I'm familiar with what Irwin says. He's very vague, and never puts a definite date to his speculations. He thinks Polynesians must have travelled to SA from EI, shortly after coming to EI. There are many logical problems with such a view, as Irwin himself understands. 1. Why would they go into the unknown against the current and wind shortly after coming to EI? I see no good reason. Usually people will explore further after overcrowding the existing habitat. Such was not the case on EI then. 2. While Irwin may be right that EI may have been the point of entry for kumara (too bad for Mr. Stone!), the Polynesians, after picking up the kumara in SA, and after returning to EI, must have wanted to leave again right away to spread it around Polynesia? Makes no sense. 3. Also too bad that Irwin directly contradicts the common mainstream theory, as expressed by Jo Anne Van Tilburg, in EASTER ISLAND, British Museum Press, 1994, that EI lost contact with the rest of the world after first settlers got there. 4. And most importantly. Once you admit contact with SA in any definite way, you are opening the Pandora Box! This will be the death of the mainstream dogma, I believe. Because, what about the megalithic walls? Did the Easter Islanders get the idea from SA also? What about tupas? What about the stone dwellings? And so on... And so the mainstream house of cards falls! ... In any case, thanks to Wade, we have now definitely passed some kind of a milestone, folks. He is the first one to cite Irwin here, and to come out clear with some kind of a (semi-)valid historical scenario to explain all these obvious EI -- SA parallels. In spite of my repeated prompting, Ross Clark has never ventured that far from his usual hazy mumbo jumbo and handwaving. When asked to provide an alternative historical scenario to the one he dismisses (so bravely!), his usual reply was "know nothing -- see nothing -- hear nothing". In other words, he always chose the courageous Three Monkeys of Nikko route. Wade, to his credit, has now gone beyond that. So let's see what happens next... Best, Yuri.Click here to go one level up in the directory.