I mean largely north Asian. People only date what they find and then revise from there. It is arrogant to think we have all of the evidence to make conclusions when the colonial powers destroyed so much of what was here. It is also not up to indigenous cultures to let European scientists to go poking through ancestral areas in order to "prove" something to them. For many indigenous cultures the ceremonies and rituals conducted as elders die are sacred and they have a beginning and an end to them. Digging up what some call artifacts and disturbing burial grounds destroys the sacred process that took place with those ceremonies and rituals.
How about if we have indigenous people go digging about the cemeteries of others to satisfy our curiosity? The story of what scientific people claim to be the truth gets changed on a frequent basis. Your absolute truth today is changed tomorrow and what they were so sure of before fades from their lips. It is ignorant to think that the indigenous tribes from areas closely similar in climate and circumstance would "evolve" to look differently because of "adaptation"to their surroundings. Surroundings with virtually no difference but yet supposedly dramatic enough to cause changes.
The truth of the matter is that what "science" has are implications and conclusions based on data about cultures they really know very little about. They are also too arrogant to realize that there may have been countless cultures that preceded any of the known cultures. The remains of those cultures may yet be hidden or they may have disappeared through natural processes. Using carbon dating the scientists boldly declare as certainty that the oldest human was "x" number of years old and are too arrogant in themselves to say "of what we have found so far" as a preface.
The ones who are supposedly "smarter" about things already destroyed much of what was here and the tribes and their languages. Things they could have actually learned from. So now they go and poke at pieces of bone and pottery and then claim to the world about what they supposedly "know".
It is not about people having a cultural belief to form their identity. It is about people of "science" being so convinced of themselves and their "conclusions" when the only thing necessary to show their folly is to take one of their books of conclusions from 100 years ago and read and compare it to their present day "conclusions". My, my how incorrect the old book was!! Likewise the book before that. So now the "scientists" are convinced that the current book won't suffer a similar fate as the predecessors? Sure thing.
The plain fact is that "science" doesn't know what it has not found. It was not that long ago that plate tectonics was unheard of. It was not that long ago that "science" was positive it had accounted for all the tribes in South America. Until they found more. The "science" people recently discovered a very large area of carvings out in the pueblos in an area they were positive they had absolutely thoroughly investigated previously.
The arrogance is making conclusions about things we really don't know. It is one thing to state data based on tests. Extrapolation to conclusions is fraught with peril. I will end with the following example. I was watching a documentary about an archaeology dig for an ancient early culture. The "scientist" talked about how the evidence she found was that they had been killed off when another culture invaded. She surmised that it was because they were a more submissive and less aggressive culture. All based on some bones, pottery and old fire sites. Nowhere in her thinking did she remain open to the possibility that the culture in question may not have been killed off due to being "submissive" or "less aggressive" but in fact many of their people may have been weakened by disease for example and been less successful for that reason in warding off an attack. She made these grand conclusions based on a handful of bone fragments and bits of pottery shards and fire sites. But she was so confident and sounded so good on the documentary. Probably if someone had told her there were more carvings in the cliffs of that pueblo area she would have scoffed and said "science" had already proven that wasn't the case.
= new reply since forum marked as read