4 ms·
I think you were a bit lax on the kon-tiki hypothesis. It didn't just posit the west-to-east colonization of Polynesia from South America, but that this was don
by shkkmo 6y ago
I think you were a bit lax on the kon-tiki hypothesis. It didn't just posit the west-to-east colonization of Polynesia from South America, but that this was done be white-people originating in the middle east.
So while there is genetic evidence for contact between South America and Polynesia, that evidence is also evidence against the Kon-Tiki hypothesis.
- wobbegongz 6y agoI do not understand that you are talking about. We have two distinct hypothesis. One is what Egyptians traveled to South America. That was his Ra Expedition. Another is that people traveled from South America to Polynesia. His Kon-Tiki expedition. You are saying: (1) Ra is wrong (2) Kon-Tiki is right (3) Because Ra is wrong Kon-Tiki is also wrong. I do not understand how you can at the same time believe (2) and (3).