nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
→"Creationist" explanation: Geographic vs. genetic origins.
:::: The source also glaringly omits obvious indications of descent like blood type, fingerprints, intelligence, and other characteristics--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:04, 17 January 2009 (EST)
:::: The source also glaringly omits obvious indications of descent like blood type, fingerprints, intelligence, and other characteristics--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:04, 17 January 2009 (EST)
Let's back up a moment here. I believe that we are confusing two different issues:
* Where, geographically, the Indians came from.
* Who, genetically, the Indians are descended from.
Most of the discussion above revolves around ''who'', not ''where'', yet Andy's edits to the article dispute ''where'' they came from as well as ''who''.
Secular anthropologists and archaeologists tend to assume, until they have reason to believe otherwise, that various people groups developed where they now are. So if they find genetic similarities between Indians and Mongolians, for example, they will tend to assume that they came from the geographical area that Mongolians now live in.
In the [[Biblical anthropology|creationist scenario]], however, people spread out around the world from Babel. So, to be completely hypothetical, the Indians may have come from the area we know as China, but started their migration from there as the next wave of arrivals from Babel settled in the region of China and displaced them. That is, they may have come from China but not be closely related to the modern Chinese (still being totally hypothetical).
Genetic relationship is derived from DNA studies. Geographical relationship is derived from archaeological evidence such as pottery and tools. Evidence in support of my hypothetical scenario would be similarity in pottery and tools with China, but a lack of similarity with DNA. If secular anthropologists and archaeologists do find this similarity of artifacts but not DNA, they will likely end up not agreeing on where the Indians came from. Lack of agreement seems to be the case here, and would suggest that they are working with an incorrect paradigm.
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 17:42, 17 January 2009 (EST)