Curator Lepper Disses Theory Put Forward in 1960's by Female Archaeologist

The largest ever genetic study of native South Americans identified a sub-population in Ecuador with an unexpected link to eastern Asia. The study, published in PLOS Genetics, concluded that Asian genes had been introduced into South America sometime after 6,000 years ago ... 

But Lepper doesn't believe it.  Well, read the article and judge for yourself.  A large DNA study isn't good enough evidence for Bradley Lepper, evidently.  What kind of evidence do you require, dude?

From The Columbus Dispatch
Archaeology | Studies examine clues of transoceanic contact
Sunday May 19, 2013 8:33 AM

Pottery offers a bonanza of information for archaeologists. It represents a revolution in container technology, and the clay from which it is made provides a canvas with many possibilities for self-expression.As a result, differences and similarities in pottery decorations can offer clues about cultural relationships over space and through time.

Residues on pots reveal important clues to how people used their pottery. An international team of scientists reported last month in the journal Nature the results of chemical analyses of the charred gunk on the surfaces of pottery shards from Jomon period sites in Japan. They determined it was composed mostly of the oily residue from cooking ocean fish.

The Jomon culture was mentioned in other news this month. The largest ever genetic study of native South Americans identified a sub-population in Ecuador with an unexpected link to eastern Asia.The study, published in PLOS Genetics, concluded that Asian genes had been introduced into South America sometime after 6,000 years ago — the same time the Jomon culture was flourishing in Japan.

Back in the 1960s, the renowned Smithsonian archaeologist Betty Meggers argued that similarities between the pottery of the contemporaneous Valdivia culture in Ecuador and Japan’s Jomon culture indicated that Japanese fishermen had “discovered” America about 5,000 years ago.

Few archaeologists took this idea seriously. Gordon McEwan and Bruce Dickson, writing in a 1978 issue of American Antiquity, pointed out significant flaws with the hypothesis. [Such as...]

First of all, Pacific Ocean currents did not provide a direct route from Japan to Ecuador. [So they could not possibly have landed in South America and travelled along the coast?  Or landed and travelled on land near the coast?] Second, Jomon dugout canoes were unlikely to have been sufficiently seaworthy to allow a crew to survive an extended voyage across the ocean. Finally, food and fresh water would have been difficult to obtain. [After Kontiki and Kontiki II, are you frigging kidding me?]

Writing in 1980, Meggers expressed frustration that transoceanic contact as an explanation for cultural similarities was dismissed by dogmatic colleagues as “cult archaeology,” and she complained that “no amount of evidence” could convince them. [Guess what - she was right, judging by this dude!]

I can appreciate Meggers’ frustration [no you can't], but although it’s likely that no amount of the same type of evidence that she marshaled in support of her original argument could make a thoroughly convincing case, I believe that most archaeologists could be convinced if compelling new evidence for transpacific contact were uncovered. [And what, precisely, would be compelling enough to you to prove that Meggers was correct in her original instincts, hmmmmm?]

The discovery of an apparent genetic link between eastern Asians and Ecuadoran natives provides intriguing independent support for Meggers’ hypothesis. [Apparent genetic link?] Moreover, the fact that Jomon pottery was used predominantly for cooking seafood suggests that Jomon fishermen would have had little trouble feeding themselves on a long ocean voyage.

Transoceanic contact long has been a popular explanation for cultural similarities, such as the occurrence of pyramids in both Egypt and Mexico. Archaeologists have demonstrated, however, that such similarities are largely superficial and meaningless. When closely examined, Egyptian and Mayan pyramids turn out to be fundamentally different things. [And this is what you accept as conclusive evidence that NO Japanese ever stepped foot in South America during the period in question?  Bwwwwwaaaaaahhhhaaaaaa!  Perfect quote from The Ten Commandments:  Ann Baxter as Nefertiri, to Yul Brenner as Ramses: Do you hear laughter, Pharaoh?]

Meggers might prove to have been right after all about the origins of Valdivia pottery, but she was wrong to attribute the rejection of her ideas to scientific dogmatism. [Not wrong, dude.  Until you've walked in her shoes, how can you possible make such a silly assertion?  How old are you?  Twelve?]  Meggers simply didn’t have the extraordinary evidence to support her extraordinary claim. [And where is your extraordinary evidence to disprove she was wrong, heh?  I think it's quite clear that you have utterly failed to convince me that you are right, but you certainly have convinced me that you are a Schmuck - with a capital "S."]

Bradley T. Lepper is curator of archaeology at the Ohio Historical Society.
blepper@ohiohistory.org