“[Hancock] presents his theories as being superior to what the first inhabitants of the area say about their own history,” said Stewart Koyiyumptewa, tribal historic preservation officer for the Hopi Nation.
The Hopi people have lived in or near the Grand Canyon for at least 2,000 years and claim a sacred site inside the canyon as their place of emergence. They also have strong ties to Chaco Canyon.
Obviously Hancock is a crackpot but saying that he offends other people with equally falsified theories is not exactly strong criticism...
How about this, then?
IMO that's basically white supremacy. The most generous possible thing you could say is that Hancock is too stupid to recognize racist bullshit when he sees it in terms of things like Quetzalcoatl being a white man (utter bullshit) but I don't think he's that stupid.
Hancock is a con man plain and simple but what part of that makes this more acceptable?
The Hopi people have lived in or near the Grand Canyon for at least 2,000 years and claim a sacred site inside the canyon as their place of emergence.
The fact that it's an indigenous folk belief and not just some crazy guy's white savior ideas?
So it’s bullshit, which granted it is pretty harmless, but it’s still bullshit when discussing the origins of people.
It doesn’t deserve to be repeated in an article about someone denying science. That claim also denies science (and common sense).
The bigger issue is Hancock's idea of indigenous people worshiping a white savior. Check out the excerpts from his book I pasted.
I like how you continue to dodge the fact the indigenous peoples claims they come from a fucking rock is ridiculous when I have already agreed that Hancock is a con man.
Yes, many indigenous folk beliefs don't make sense. But there's a reason punching down is a shitty thing to do. And you are punching down on indigenous people. Maybe just accept that they have a belief that doesn't make sense, since it isn't hurting anyone.
Unlike the racist with the hugely popular Netflix show.
Seriously? Punching down because I pointed out how unscientific claims should not be repeated as if they hold any weight?
Maybe just accept that they have a belief that doesn't make sense, since it isn't hurting anyone.
No. Treating idiotic claims as if they had any merit because you see them as harmless is dangerous. All misinformation is harmful.
Unlike the racist
I know this is super difficult for you to comprehend because of how terminally online you are but I never disputed that Hancock is a racist. That isn’t even an argument that is happening outside of your head.
I know you’re the most terminally online person on lemmy (and second is a distant place) but get some perspective please. I suggest you touch grass.
I never said you disputed it.
But since you think there is a danger in this indigenous belief, please tell me what it is.
I would say that it wouldn't be in even the top 100 dangers indigenous people have faced and continue to face when it comes to the people that colonized the Americas.
You still haven’t admitted the claim they came from some rocks is bullshit. You just keep dodging like the terminally online redditor you really are.
Seriously turn the computer and phone off and go touch some grass.
I literally said:
So is your issue that I didn't literally use the word "bullshit?" Otherwise, I don't know how I could have been clearer or why you think I was dodging anything.
Now I expect you will talk about touching grass for a third time.
Wait, you think Hancock came up with Quetzalcoatl being a white bearded man? XD
No. I think he perpetuates that racism.
Here is Quetzalcoatl (and not in his usual winged serpent form) from the pre-Spanish Maya. Does he look like a white man to you or a local indigenous person? Don't you think if Hancock didn't want to just perpetuate racist bullshit he could have just looked that up himself, what with being a journalist and all?
But that's just one image, right? And no color! I'm sure after the Spanish came and had them draw him...
Oh.
I thought journalists were supposed to do research.
Of course, if you're a journalist who wishes to perpetuate racism...
Obviously Hancock is a crackpot but saying that he offends other people with equally falsified theories is not exactly strong criticism...
How about this, then?
IMO that's basically white supremacy. The most generous possible thing you could say is that Hancock is too stupid to recognize racist bullshit when he sees it in terms of things like Quetzalcoatl being a white man (utter bullshit) but I don't think he's that stupid.
Hancock is a con man plain and simple but what part of that makes this more acceptable?
The fact that it's an indigenous folk belief and not just some crazy guy's white savior ideas?
So it’s bullshit, which granted it is pretty harmless, but it’s still bullshit when discussing the origins of people.
It doesn’t deserve to be repeated in an article about someone denying science. That claim also denies science (and common sense).
The bigger issue is Hancock's idea of indigenous people worshiping a white savior. Check out the excerpts from his book I pasted.
I like how you continue to dodge the fact the indigenous peoples claims they come from a fucking rock is ridiculous when I have already agreed that Hancock is a con man.
Yes, many indigenous folk beliefs don't make sense. But there's a reason punching down is a shitty thing to do. And you are punching down on indigenous people. Maybe just accept that they have a belief that doesn't make sense, since it isn't hurting anyone.
Unlike the racist with the hugely popular Netflix show.
Seriously? Punching down because I pointed out how unscientific claims should not be repeated as if they hold any weight?
No. Treating idiotic claims as if they had any merit because you see them as harmless is dangerous. All misinformation is harmful.
I know this is super difficult for you to comprehend because of how terminally online you are but I never disputed that Hancock is a racist. That isn’t even an argument that is happening outside of your head.
I know you’re the most terminally online person on lemmy (and second is a distant place) but get some perspective please. I suggest you touch grass.
I never said you disputed it.
But since you think there is a danger in this indigenous belief, please tell me what it is.
I would say that it wouldn't be in even the top 100 dangers indigenous people have faced and continue to face when it comes to the people that colonized the Americas.
You still haven’t admitted the claim they came from some rocks is bullshit. You just keep dodging like the terminally online redditor you really are.
Seriously turn the computer and phone off and go touch some grass.
I literally said:
So is your issue that I didn't literally use the word "bullshit?" Otherwise, I don't know how I could have been clearer or why you think I was dodging anything.
Now I expect you will talk about touching grass for a third time.
Wait, you think Hancock came up with Quetzalcoatl being a white bearded man? XD
No. I think he perpetuates that racism.
Here is Quetzalcoatl (and not in his usual winged serpent form) from the pre-Spanish Maya. Does he look like a white man to you or a local indigenous person? Don't you think if Hancock didn't want to just perpetuate racist bullshit he could have just looked that up himself, what with being a journalist and all?
But that's just one image, right? And no color! I'm sure after the Spanish came and had them draw him...
Oh.
I thought journalists were supposed to do research.
Of course, if you're a journalist who wishes to perpetuate racism...