3 ms·
This is a completely baseless theory with no citations or evidence at all other than the “11% ancestry” (what does that mean?). “Let assume that this new analy
by ace2358 4y ago
This is a completely baseless theory with no citations or evidence at all other than the “11% ancestry” (what does that mean?).
“Let assume that this new analysis is correct.”
Yeah okay mate. I wouldn’t say that “this is a known fact”
- _dain_ 4y agoit's based on DNA studies and ancestry percentage has a perfectly well-defined meaning
- ace2358 4y agoI understand how the theory of dna ancestry works, but it’s not so clear cut. We still don’t have a good understanding of how these things work over the time scales of Australia (60,000 years of inhabitation). Saying that one boat accidentally crashed and took over Australia culturally is technically possible but completely without evidence, “11%” or not.