Native american indians and Indians

[Square Ninja]

"I think it was quite clear to them that they did not land at India. If it wasn't immediately, then it became clear shortly thereafter. My guess is that the term "Indian" came from the people who heard/saw Columbus travel back and have never seen an actual Indian in their lives."

Think of it this way, Columbus was sailing blindly to the west. He just assumed india was the closest one could go. What proof did he have that a New World even existed? By the best of his knowledge, he believed he'd hit India.

Oh please...it's not as though no one had ever been to India before. The description alone should not have matched what he saw when he landed.

From every history lesson I've heard, it's been said that Columbus, to his death, thought he'd landed in India.

It was quite obvious that India is not the same land as what would become the Americas. Every history professor I've ever had can tell you that Columbus was not so thick-headed, judging by his behavior outside of that in the shitty elementary school lessons.

Perhaps Columbus wasn't as bright as you believe. How many times had he been to india before? Was he a merchant? A cartogropher? He didn't land at any known port town, and it's highly possible that isolate tribes could bear very different cultures.

I highly doubt that, even if the people are genetically related at some point.

 

[CK the Fat]

India isn't a small place, you must realize. Many miles of coastlines, much uncharted territory.

It goes farther than elementray school. My AP textbook states the same.

I highly doubt that, even if the people are genetically related at some point.

What difference does that make? Different tribes, different customs, etc. You can see it anywhere where there are isolated peoples.

 

[Milky]

Like Pho Said, India Indians and Native Americans both are part of the mongoloid race.

It is said that the native americans migrated from asia to North America thru an ice-bridge inbetween russia and Alaska.


And whoever this friend is. Give him a slap for me. Im an India-Indian. And i take offense to that comment.

 

[quitejaded]

Well,

Some guy i know said that Native american indians are just the same as Indians ( Live in asia)..this is obviously not true but i cant find much backup on the net

could someone give there own reasons in this topic or some links to prove native americans are not indians....also how did native americans indians got called indians..

Thanks...any help would be great!!:thumbsup:

They came from Mongolia, not Russia.

 

[Ysu]

Well, the "Real Eve" theory goes . . .

Modern man originated in Africa. It was from there that they crossed into the hills of Yemen in lower Arabia (Egypt and Sinai were too hostile to cross at that time). And from there they spread southeast, and thats when Aboriginals crossed into Australia. After that migration, the people moved North, into the Middle East (where Civilization would first take root). Some migrated into the far north, into Europe, and thats where they met the Neanderthals (who were eventually wiped out by the ingenuity of modern man). Others crossed northeast into Asia, and some eventually made it the Americas through the Bering land bridge.

The first modern humans were Black. It was only through migrations and less exposure to the sun in northern areas that skin color would begin to change. Less sun means less Vitamin D, and in a world where there are no supplmental pills, the amount of Melanin in your skin changed accordingly, every 20,000 years that is.

 

[Square Ninja]

Like Pho Said, India Indians and Native Americans both are part of the mongoloid race.

It is said that the native americans migrated from asia to North America thru an ice-bridge inbetween russia and Alaska.

This is not entirely true. Archeological evidence proves that the artifacts are actually older as you travel south. That pretty much destroyed what was once the usual pseudo-scientific justification of creationism.

 

[Athletics Legend]

Like Pho Said, India Indians and Native Americans both are part of the mongoloid race.

It is said that the native americans migrated from asia to North America thru an ice-bridge inbetween russia and Alaska.


And whoever this friend is. Give him a slap for me. Im an India-Indian. And i take offense to that comment.

Hes not my friend:cursing: , hes just some **** from my athletics team..

Dont worry, your not the only one feeling offended...and im not a girl, im gonna give him a punch to the face..:thumbup:

 

[Katattack]

Like Pho Said, India Indians and Native Americans both are part of the mongoloid race.

It is said that the native americans migrated from asia to North America thru an ice-bridge inbetween russia and Alaska.


And whoever this friend is. Give him a slap for me. Im an India-Indian. And i take offense to that comment.

Thanks for that. What an insult it would be to be called Native American. Notice I didn't take offense to the comment.

 

[Little_Red]

Columbus was sailing for India.

He landed in the Carribean. Still thought he was in India. So he called the inhabitants "Indians." And he never found out he was wrong.

that's pretty much the reason why they call them that. i don wonder what they would call indians (non-native american kind) if they weren't indians...does that even make sense?

 

[KrytenKoro]

To be perfectly fair, there is some evidence that at least the most Western of the Native American tribes share some etymology with the current Japanese race (not their own native race, but the ones we call Japanese today). A good number of very similar words and place-names mean the same things in both languages, and the tribes had to start SOMEWHERE before crossing the Bering Ice Bridge - and there's nothing saying migration didn't continue after the Ice Age.

The 3 "races" are Mongoloid, Negroid, and Caucasoid.

And by the way, CK, race is not the same thing as species. If we work really hard, it may eventually be, but historically, they are different types of divisions of a group of creatures.

 

[Square Ninja]

To be perfectly fair, there is some evidence that at least the most Western of the Native American tribes share some etymology with the current Japanese race (not their own native race, but the ones we call Japanese today). A good number of very similar words and place-names mean the same things in both languages, and the tribes had to start SOMEWHERE before crossing the Bering Ice Bridge - and there's nothing saying migration didn't continue after the Ice Age.

That is true.

My point was that the archeological evidence disproves some of the Bering Straight Migration Theory. Yes, it is true that ancient peoples did cross at the Bering Straight. The only problem we have with that is that people were trying to use it to justify Creationism. They said that it started in the Middle-East, and then they moved out. Eventually they moved further north and just crossed that landbridge. That's how they claimed all the Native Americans got there. If they had in fact migrated Southward, then the further north we looked, the old the artifacts should have been. That's not the case, though.

 

[KrytenKoro]

My point was that the archeological evidence disproves some of the Bering Straight Migration Theory. Yes, it is true that ancient peoples did cross at the Bering Straight. The only problem we have with that is that people were trying to use it to justify Creationism. They said that it started in the Middle-East, and then they moved out. Eventually they moved further north and just crossed that landbridge. That's how they claimed all the Native Americans got there. If they had in fact migrated Southward, then the further north we looked, the old the artifacts should have been. That's not the case, though.

Not unless people left those areas after they passed through them. It's evident that they didn't, and there's no reason they should. So younger artifacts should be expected, especially since there is no reason for a non-academic tribe to preserve broken spoons that great-great grandma used to use.
And I was fairly certain that biology believes that humans started in Africa and moved outward. Wouldn't that be directly contradictory to the point you are trying to make?

 

[Square Ninja]

Not unless people left those areas after they passed through them. It's evident that they didn't, and there's no reason they should. So younger artifacts should be expected, especially since there is no reason for a non-academic tribe to preserve broken spoons that great-great grandma used to use.

I'm pretty sure they would have left crap behind if they migrated. What would have been the point of traveling all that way South only to travel further North again later?

And I was fairly certain that biology believes that humans started in Africa and moved outward. Wouldn't that be directly contradictory to the point you are trying to make?

Not necessarily. The Bering Straight might not have been the only way for ancient peoples to migrate over to the Americas.

 

[KrytenKoro]

I'm pretty sure they would have left crap behind if they migrated. What would have been the point of traveling all that way South only to travel further North again later?

Why would the entire tribe keep going?

Not necessarily. The Bering Straight might not have been the only way for ancient peoples to migrate over to the Americas.

Of course not.

They said that it started in the Middle-East, and then they moved out.

This is what I was talking about.

 

[Square Ninja]

Why would the entire tribe keep going?

Gee, I don't know. Maybe it was warmer and more hospitable further South?

 

[KrytenKoro]

Gee, I don't know. Maybe it was warmer and more hospitable further South?

That didn't make the more recent northern tribes migrate south, so why would it make the first ones? Of course, some would move, but others would be fine, and would not care enough to move.

 

[Square Ninja]

That didn't make the more recent northern tribes migrate south, so why would it make the first ones? Of course, some would move, but others would be fine, and would not care enough to move.

We'd still find evidence.

 

[KrytenKoro]

We'd still find evidence.

Why? Native Americans did a lot less artifact preservation than the materialistic and idol-worshipful Europeans did. If it was no longer useful, why keep it?

 

[Phoenix]

So? Proof is always left when a group of humans moves.

 

[KrytenKoro]

So? Proof is always left when a group of humans moves.

Really? Everlasting proof that we would recognize as proof? Why would this be?