craig
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by craig on Sept 27, 2012 7:24:25 GMT -5
I hope i do not offend any Native Americans who have mixed ancestry but i always wondered what natural full-blooded Native American women looked like, which is what led me to this wonderful site.
I hope that anyone can post any photos of the true beauty of Native American full-blood women as old as possible here, i would be so grateful for that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dietmar on Sept 27, 2012 11:02:13 GMT -5
|
|
craig
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by craig on Sept 27, 2012 12:49:09 GMT -5
Thank you and i have seen it, it was so fascinating but the other reaso i asked for this thread is because they always say how Native Americans look like mongoloid asians which does not seem to be true.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladonna on Sept 28, 2012 22:31:49 GMT -5
What I dont look like a mongolian!!!
Who said that!!
|
|
craig
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by craig on Sept 29, 2012 5:49:51 GMT -5
Scientists did but even an ojibwe guy said the following:
"I am Native American and we are Mongoloid also and the one who calls herself Wiininiskwe is an idiot, for some reason alot of natives don't like the idea we are asian
DNA does not lie"
This is why i would love for anyone to post old photos of real native american fullblooded women ho they used to look like before the intermarriages, i believe there were photos from the 1850's and 1860's, so i would be very grateful if anyone can post it here.
|
|
|
|
Post by emilylevine on Sept 29, 2012 13:50:51 GMT -5
LaDonna, you crack me up!
|
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Sept 30, 2012 3:51:09 GMT -5
Hi Craig, here are some Lakota women  Susie Lone Elk (Oglala) - Ear of Corn (Oglala) - White Hawk (Oglala - Cheyenne River Woman (1937) ... and here are some Tibetan Woman - so compare:  |
|
craig
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by craig on Sept 30, 2012 5:25:15 GMT -5
Thank you gregor, i'm looking forward to see a lot more other Native American fullblood women from other tribes as well, i forgot to say i'm doing research for a project on it too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dietmar on Sept 30, 2012 7:49:09 GMT -5
Oh well,
whoever made the quote above... American Indians are not Asians. If you find a scientist who said that you better send him back to school.
There as many differences as similarities, even when you use DNA techniques. It´s not that simple...
P.S.: btw, my wife looks Italian... and she even speaks Italian, but she´s not ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Sept 30, 2012 9:38:11 GMT -5
Hi, of course they are no Asians, but they share ancestors - like Caucasians and Africans. No "race" fell from heaven. And by DNA you can trace the route they migrated.  Some more here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_PaleoindiansGregor |
|
|
|
Post by ladonna on Sept 30, 2012 10:49:04 GMT -5
If i knew how to post a picture of me i would send it to you,
I am considered full blood i am 7/8 Standing Rock and 1/8 Oglala
|
|
|
|
Post by Dietmar on Oct 1, 2012 15:08:15 GMT -5
Gregor, sorry if I was a bit brusque, but the theories about the settlement of America is not only a matter of science, but also of politics. As far as I know, there are many theories which are just that... theories. Every new evidence raise further questions. I recommend Vine Deloria Jr.´s "Red Earth, White Lies" (or any other of his books) for further reading. indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2011/03/24/bering-strait-into-controversy-2472172.52.202.216/~fenderse/Deloria.htmJensen: So you view the theory that human beings came to North and South America across the Bering Strait as an article of faith, rather than as fact?
Deloria: I've yet to see any remotely convincing evidence to support it. It's a doctrinal belief that institutional science has imposed on us.
The effort to deny that Indians are native to this land really started with the old Spanish clerics, who tried to identify Indians as either survivors of Noah's flood or members of the lost tribes of Israel. So modern scientific theories are part of an entrenched line of thought: a Judeo-Christian insistence on seeing the world through Eurocentric eyes. Indians cannot simply be Indians. They have to have come from somewhere in or around Europe.
Jensen: Why is this issue of deep origins important?
Deloria: People want to believe that the Western Hemisphere, and North America in particular, was vacant, un-exploited, fertile land waiting to be cultivated according to God's holy dictates. The hemisphere thus belonged to whomever was able to "rescue" it from its wilderness state. We see the same rationalization at work today in the Amazon and elsewhere. If the Indians were not the original inhabitants of this continent but relative latecomers who had barely unpacked when Columbus came knocking on the door, then they had no real claim to the land and could be swept away with impunity. Thus, science justifies history and eases the guilt over five centuries of violence. Even today, I hear some non-Indians say, "Well, aren't we all immigrants from somewhere?" The short answer is no. By making Indians immigrants to North America, Westerners are able to deny the fact that this is our continent.
Another way science has assuaged Western guilt is by claiming to prove that Indians are just as destructive as Westerners. You've probably heard of the Pleistocene overkill hypothesis, which states, without any real evidence, that as soon as Indians "arrived" here, they started killing everything in sight. When the hypothesis was first proposed some fifty years ago by Carl Sauer, it was shot down almost immediately by Loren C. Eiseley, who raised numerous concerns that have never been refuted. One is the fact that not only large mammals disappeared during the Pleistocene Epoch, but also birds, mollusks, and frogs, which could not have been hunted to extinction. Also, there is no evidence that tribal hunting groups using ancient techniques could exterminateor even significantly alter an animal population, unless the hunters and prey were restricted to a very small area. The example of modern tribes who still use Stone Age methods supports this.
So the overkill theory remained dead in the water until the 1960s, when it was revived by a book called Pleistocene Extinctions. Since then, as the destruction of the natural world has become ever more difficult to ignore, Westerners have needed ever stronger salves for their consciences, so the theory has risen up again in full force. Although there is still little real evidence to support it, its ideological function to prove that destructiveness is part of human nature, and not just the result of a destructive way of living in and perceiving the world is important enough to justify its admission into the scientific canon.
There's even a new theory that Indians were responsible for the near extinction of the buffalo. According to this argument, Indian winter encampments deprived the buffalo of feed, and so the population plummeted.
Jensen: How could anyone make that claim?
Deloria: Simple: by ignoring all evidence that contradicts the thesis, such as 1870s newspaper reports of white hunters shipping out trainloads of buffalo hides. In the Dodge City area alone, hunters killed 3 million buffalo in three years.
Jensen: If Indians didn't cross the Bering Strait, how did they come to inhabit this continent? What do the Indians themselves say?
Deloria: That last question isn't asked often enough, and points out another problem with the scientific tradition. Somehow it is presumed that scientists, and thus Europeans, know better than the Indians themselves how Indians got here and how they lived prior to Columbus. That attitude is patronizing at best. Instead of digging and analyzing, why don't researchers just ask the Indians? And then, having asked, why don't they take the answers seriously?
Indians' beliefs about their origins vary considerably from tribe to tribe. Many tribes simply begin their story at a certain location and describe their migrations. Others will say they came from another continent by boat. (Of course, archaeologists generally refuse to believe them, because they think Indians couldn't have built boats, which is absurd.) A number of tribes say that they were created here. A few say they came here through a portal from another world. They walked into a cave or tunnel, for example, until it was completely dark, and they continued walking until a tiny light appeared ahead of them. As they kept moving toward it, it grew bigger, gradually revealing itself to be an entrance to a new world.
Personally, I like the Pacific Northwest tribes' idea that, in the distant past, the physical world was not dominant, and you could
change your shape and experience life as an animal, plant, or bird. Then the world changed, and some people were caught in different shapes and became animals, plants, and so on.
Much of the Indian knowledge of origins is revealed in ceremonial settings and involves views of time, space, matter, and cosmic purpose that the scientific perspective considers heretical. Because of this, such accounts are generally dismissed out of hand as superstition: nice campfire stories that have no connection to reality.
Greetings Dietmar |
|
|
|
Post by gregor on Oct 2, 2012 9:12:53 GMT -5
Hi Dietmar, no problem! I know that the question of the colonization of the Americas is for American Natives a political question - what I also understand. But politics and science are (of course) two different things. Especially in the last five years, there has been a significant progress in the study of migration and colonization of this planet. We know where mankind started and how it spread across the planet - either by DNA analysis (I am not an expert in biology and will not dwell here on the topics of DNA and mt-DNA - what can be exciting), Linguistic analyzes or even legends. It is interesting that scientists from different disciplines come to the same result (scientists from different countries of this planet - not only americans). I stand for the Bering Strait theory, as well that way the Natives (and I'm talking about "American Indians") were the first on the American continent - and you know with what side I sympathize. As far as I know was Vine Deloria theologian (who - according to wikipedia - rejected the theory of evolution) - and I'm not so religious . --> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vine_Deloria,_Jr. Sorry, but in these questions I'm on the side of science, but I do not mean to offend somebody. But maybe it's actually a matter of faith, and we should finish the debate here. CU Gregor |
|
|
|
Post by ladonna on Oct 2, 2012 12:31:57 GMT -5
Vine Deloria was a theologian? He was a professor who taught at Colorado University and wrote many books from our point of view and was an enrolled member of my Tribal Nation. His Father was Theologian. It is according to our stories and belief that we did not come from the Bering Strait and that it is a myth created by a monk who never made it north of Mexico City. he could not believe that we could create such great cities. It is an act of racism created by the church.
I took a class in college on the Bering Strait Theroy and according all the data we went though there was no possible way for our people to come from the Bering Strait, most of our stories say we come from South American and in fact our oldest remains are in the south. As a Native Woman -Ihunktonwana-Pabaska-Sisseton-Hunkpapa-Sihasapa and Oglala which mean Lakota and Dakota I know who I am and where i came from. I am not Chinese
|
|
|
|
Post by pellethie on Oct 13, 2012 14:51:20 GMT -5
Vine Deloria was a theologian? He was a professor who taught at Colorado University and wrote many books from our point of view and was an enrolled member of my Tribal Nation. His Father was Theologian. It is according to our stories and belief that we did not come from the Bering Strait and that it is a myth created by a monk who never made it north of Mexico City. he could not believe that we could create such great cities. It is an act of racism created by the church. I took a class in college on the Bering Strait Theroy and according all the data we went though there was no possible way for our people to come from the Bering Strait, most of our stories say we come from South American and in fact our oldest remains are in the south. As a Native Woman -Ihunktonwana-Pabaska-Sisseton-Hunkpapa-Sihasapa and Oglala which mean Lakota and Dakota I know who I am and where i came from. I am not Chinese That could warrant a bit of debate.  In tens of thousands of years people can do a lot of moving around. Down from the extreme northwest, southward across what is now North America, Central America and into South America, some heading northwards again following game or escaping bad weather conditions. To my knowledge the earliest once passed through what is now northeastern Russia. But that wouldn’t make them Russian or Chinese, just people passing through lands following game. I know you are not Chinese, just as I am not what your friends over at Dr. Al’s place called me. Not going for that Kenniwick Man B.S. either. |
|
