History Channel: Who really discovered America? (Polynesians!)

Anyone ever catch this show? It has a big section about how Polynesians likely came to Southern California and South America

When I woke up this morning my kids were watching a "Who really discovered America" show on History Channel and it had just gotten to the part where they talked about how some researchers believe that islanders would set out on discovery voyages (following directions birds went and the winds)-- they showed off some interesting evidence found near Santa Barbara and Catalina island which were Tahitian style fishhooks. Also in South America they found chicken bones that match the type of chickens that originated on the islands.

One researcher estimated that it would have taken 300 days to get their boats from the islands up to Santa Barbara with currents and trade winds, and that was a lot of paddling. So they guessed that in order to maintain long voyages they took chickens and fishing supplies with them and just lived off the waters along the way. Pretty cool.

I've always found this topic pretty fascinating. If you can catch it it's entertaining.

Definitely worth watching.

Catalina Island: Meeting point of ancient Polynesians from the West, and Polynesian pop purveyors from the East. Cool! :)

Polynesians in Santa Barbara?? I'm definitely gonna have to check this out!

DC

Keep in mind though that we are talking about the History Channel. They are pretty well known for reporting crackpot, unsubstantiated theories preceded by the "some scholars believe" line. Which ultimately means nothing more than somebody believes it. I suppose that's the justification for half their scheduled shows being related to conspiracy theories, ghosts, aliens, sasquatch and many other fringe beliefs that should hardly be on the "History" channel.

That being said, it's certainly worth a watch, and may even be legit. Just make sure you have your skeptic hat on, they are nowhere near above peddling bs for the sake of ratings and ad revenue.

Here'a proof!

Oh definitely hear you on the History Channel thing. It gotten so wacky! I think the thing that peeked my interest with this were the things that were actually found... Fishhooks, boat parts, and the Polynesian skull. I'd love to see DNA testing though.

Of course the "stories" are what I care most about. Isn't it fun to think about how some native Americans have stories about how they came from out of the sea? Makes you wonder how myth and facts morphed over the years as stories were passed down. And now we are the storytellers who have to keep legends alive. I love it!

somewhat ironic that this topic is raised on Leif Erikson Day.

What? The History Channel showing something OTHER than WW2 Nazi Documentaries? There was a reason we used to call the history Channel "The Hitler Channel" back when we actually had cable. Shows on anything other than The Third Reich were few and far between back then.

Anyway, there is indeed evidence that Polynesians had contact with native populations in SoCal. The Chumash and Tongva (Gabrielinos) both built sewn plank canoes in a style similar to Polynesians and both tribes ventured out upon the ocean. I've always had trouble with the old line academics who constantly pooh pooh the idea that ancient peoples could cross oceans. There is all sorts of evidence that it occurred.

Any mariner can tell you that the historians and archaeologists, that claim that ancient peoples always stayed close in to shore and never ventured out onto the vast oceans because of the dangers, are full of it. Because anyone who has been a sailor can tell you that inshore is really the most dangerous place to be, that tends to be where the things that ships run into and sink are. Sailors will tell you that deep water is safer than shorelines.

Far too many people think that because those earlier people lived in a time without our modern technology, that they must have been stupid or something. Our ancestors were just as smart as we are, they just had a different knowledge base, different understanding of the world, and a different set of technologies than we posses today. The concept that it COULDN'T have happened because of WHEN it supposedly happened is egotistical, backwards, and in my opinion, outright stupidity.

Bear

No kidding, we used to call it the Hitlerstory Channel. While I approve in the reduction of Hitler related content, I just wish it was not replaced with aliens, ghosts and the Chupacabra.

Yeah, sadly it's all about the ratings. I remember when barely ANY Bigfoot specials ran on tv... now it's commonplace. People just love the unknown. I guess they think it's even more legit and real when it's on something called "The History Channel" than SyFy.

Compare the two sentences....

"Oh, they have proof of ______, I saw it on the SyFy Channel!"

"Oh, they have proof of______ , I saw it on the History Channel!"

Thank god their Hitler fascination kind of faded away. I'll take Bigfoot, UFOs and psychics over that guy any day. :)

Here is a book that seems to cover the subject pretty well.

You can read some of it on google books.

Book

And another article with a nice map.

Article

DC

[ Edited by: Dustycajun 2011-10-10 20:18 ]

Where is Thor Heyerdahl when you need him?

still celebrating Leif Erikson Day...

The show's on youtube, here's part 3. Polynesia starts about 5 minutes in and continues a couple minutes into part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8uy8bUMonM&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLA6125025512CA524
A couple seconds of Kon Tiki footage and one sound byte from the Bishop Museum, drat.
Speaking of Kon Tiki, Thor's voyage is watchable also!

Watching that documentary, it's frustrating to see that people - scholars! - still completely misrepresent Heyerdahl's theory. He did not think (those we call) the Polynesians came from South America. That is an oversimplified 'strawman' version of his theories. After reading Kon-Tiki, way back, I read his more scholarly work, American Indians in the Pacific, which lays out the details and background for his theories.
Heyerdahl thought that Polynesia was colonized multiple times, by different peoples. He thought the Polynesians encountered by Europeans were descended primarily from people who traveled north, along the coast of Asia, across into Alaska and down to settle along the Pacific Northwest coast. Eventually, some migrated to Hawaii, and from there, to the rest of Polynesia.
They found some of the islands already somewhat populated... by descendants of people who rafted from South America, bringing certain foods (e.g., sweet potato), and a penchant for monolithic stone carving. The Polynesians conquered them, assimilated some of the people and some elements of the culture, and wiped out the rest.
Heyerdahl also encountered traditions and stories that many islands had an aboriginal people there, before the South Americans or Polynesians arrived. They were described as darker-skinned, of small stature and negroid-like features. These people the Hawaiians called the "Menehune"; the Maori and Rarotongans, the "Manahune".
Heyerdahl gave serious consideration to the chants, stories and traditions that had been passed down for scores of generations, and used them to help interpret archeological findings, in some cases. He collected and studied an abundance of inter-disciplinary material, to form and bolster his theories (that book was over 800 pages). I'm not saying Heyerdahl was correct. But I've noticed for decades that when "experts" dismiss his "theory" as the delusions of a crack-pot, or declare it's disproved, they're not evaluating his actual theory at all!