I always really wonder what kind of reaction people are expecting when they send messages like this. Are my feelings supposed to be hurt? It’s not like I wrote that paper.
I don’t even have to check; the quoted sentences are from an article from the Sino-Platonic papers, related to the Warring States Project at University of Massachusetts at Amherst. The whole point of the project and the format change of the publication to open access was as a challenge to academic gatekeeping, with a focus on unconventional research.
If anyone would like to read all 273 pages of Scientific Evidence for Pre-Columbian Transoceanic Voyages to and From the Americas by John L. Sorenson and Carl L. Johanssen, you can do so.
Not sure where you’re getting the “ancient Egyptian sailors” thing from. But it’s a sad academic world indeed if saying that no one ever traveled across the Atlantic ocean in this particular 2,000+ year span, NO EXCEPTIONS EVER!!! is perfectly reasonable, but saying that it’s possible that someone may have done so since that is a massive amount of time is “laughable”.
But hey, who am I to challenge the assumptions and easily-memorized generalizations you’ve accrued in your undergrad education? I’m sure you’ll go quite far without ever questioning what you’ve learned from your textbooks, which of course could never possibly have some kind of agenda like a free tumblr blog does. ;) Yay! you win! Enjoy your life full of self-satisfaction over your extremely narrow, yet widely accepted worldview.
God I love this blog.
Sorenson and Johanssen believe in the historicity of the Book of Mormon and their book (while parts of it are valid and occasional trans-oceanic contact is likely, though trade routes are highly doubtful) is basically tacit support for Joseph Smith’s narrative claims about the lost tribes of Israel immigrating to America and becoming Native Americans in the Book of Mormon. (Which is kind of insane).
It’s not a good source to base your conclusions on trans-oceanic contact, though it might lead you to some fascinating sources. Also, brow beating people with the length of it as if the length automatically determines the validity of the book is bullshit, but I’m used to MPOC using dodgy sources or at least not understanding how to differentiate theory from established fact (that boqta/henin post from long ago stands out) so I guess I’m not surprised.
Which is a shame, as they are promoting a lot of interesting history that most people never hear about bc of institutionalized racism, and I do agree with their mission statement to make it obvious that the world was multi-cultural and international long before our current assumptions.
But anytime MPOC ventures outside of art history into the realm of people/events/movements etc., it’s pretty painful and awkward to watch.
Other books of Sorenson’s include:
Mormon’s Codex: An Ancient American Book (2013), An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon (1985), Transoceanic Culture Contacts between the Old and New Worlds in Pre-Columbian Times: A Comprehensive Annotated Bibliography (with Martin Raish, 1988),Images of Ancient America: Visualizing Book of Mormon Life (1998), Mormon’s Map (2000), and World Trade and Biological Exchanges before 1492 (with Carl L. Johannessen, 2004).
Re the bolded: The thing is, I’m not “basing my conclusions” on anything.
I haven’t arrived at any conclusions on this. If your beef is that I’m providing links to research that has an agenda, well…need I point out that ALL research necessitates an agenda of some kind? Did I cover this with Impartial Historian Unicorn?
A lot of people believe that god wrote the Christian Bible. Does that make its worth as a text moot? It’s still worth exploring and talking about, because it has social influence. Do the beliefs of some people negate the actions of others on the same topic?
I’m honestly not afraid of being wrong in “public”-I’m willing to put myself out there to have these discussions. If it’s painful or awkward for you to watch, then turn away from it. Ignore it. I’m willing to let my underpants flap in the breeze and be uncomfortable as well as saying things that make other people uncomfortable.
That being said, I don’t think I’m wrong for posting a link to that paper. And I’ll happily reblog this in case readers want to know more about religious affiliations that should probably be considered when reading the paper, too. :)