@johncrwarner The Native Americans are the aboriginal peoples of the New World and as such are not considered immigrants. Also, they have been here substantially longer than 10,000 years.
@kaysandesses Just because you do not consider the native americans immigrants does not make it so - we know that all humans came originally from outside the americas so they are migrated here. I accept that the 10,000 years was a little short but the earliest artifacts indicate 18000 years as the earliest settlements in the americas.
@johncrwarner Regardless of what *you* think, in the fields of anthropology and demography, aboriginal peoples are not considered immigrants. Keep on splitting hairs if you think it adds validity to your argument. Furthermore, there is much debate as to when humans first arrived in the Western Hemisphere, with some evidence pointing back as far as 50 kya. For the purposes of the present discussion, the timing of their arrival makes no difference.
@kaysandesses As I don't generally live in quotation marks I was wondering why you put the word "you" inside them? Migration is the process of moving from one place to another to live. If you move from a place you are emigrating and if you arrive in a place you are immigrating. These words have additional meanings in the modern word - they are associated with legal status and paperwork - none of which applied to any of the peoples that arrived in the Americas. cont
@johncrwarner The other problem is that there have been several waves of peoples into the Americas and the problem for the anthropologists and demographers is to ascertain who genuinely was the first to arrive as they are the only by their definition non-immigrants. Does not require the answer to that question and as far as I can see if not otherwise problematic for the study of human arrival and living in the Americas.
@kaysandesses And I await yours with eagerness - please show me where I am wrong - except your appeal to authority with no references and a couple of rogue quotation marks - which imply condescension on your part - but I could be wrong there.
@johncrwarner I'll put my graduate degree in anthropology up against your simple insistence that Native Americans are considered immigrants by anthropologists. The fact that you claimed they have been here only 10,000 years demonstrates your overall lack of knowledge of the subject. I have neither the time, nor the inclination to educate you on the basics of the peopling of the New World.
@kaysandesses First - I did not assert that anthropologists say - I say that they migrated to the Americas as we now know it and that is in everyday speech called immigration - I have never asserted anything about anthropologists and I have to say I am intrigued why anthropologists would be concerned about defining first arrivals and later arrivals - is anthropology the study of human societies - not their pre-history. Do theories hang on this notion of first arrivals versus immigrants?
@kaysandesses 2) I agree that my knowledge of the arrival and archaelogy of the Americas is limited / non-existent - and I accept that people have been living in the Americas for longer than my first figure of 10 000 years. I am merely asserting that all people who migrate to a new place are immigrants - you disagree - and you offer no reasoning except appeals to authority - just quote a source except yourself that says this and I will endeavour to check it.
@johncrwarner I would like to add that I have nothing personally against you as an individual. (btw, the quotation marks were in fact an asterisk before and after the word "you", and are intended to add emphasis as we would with italics, if only YouTube would support such things.)
@kaysandesses I did have a nice day - and am just about to go and teach English to my students on the summer course here in Germany in 30+ C (late 80s to early 90s Fahrenheit)
I am always curious why people end up defending positions - and most interestingly how they do so - you seem to have chosen to appeal to authority which is a very interesting choice.
Why doesn't Arizona force their entire population to prove that they are citizens. White,black brown, everybody. Then following that all, new citizens must prove their citizenship. White,black or brown.
@KasparHauser4 That would need an ID card system and would cost a fortune and a huge growth in government - oh dear the rational response to the "illegal immigration crisis" would be in opposition to one of their other policies. They will therefore fudge this one.
Hey Mr Reporter Boner is NOT the House Leader he is the Minority Leader
1234uz 1 year ago
john boehner gives a whole new meaning to changing colors. lol. his Republican colleagues might discriminate him now that he looks like a minority.
thanggnguyen 1 year ago
Berry needs to read a little history.
FOX is getting soft.
FlowerClown 1 year ago
If power companies lose customers, that would make prices go up - which is bad.
ChiefDen4 1 year ago
Wong is just wong.
Calimantalkin 1 year ago
I you're not native American then at one time or another you were all immigrants.
minteko 1 year ago 3
@minteko and the native Americans are immigrants from 10 000 years before.
johncrwarner 1 year ago
@johncrwarner The Native Americans are the aboriginal peoples of the New World and as such are not considered immigrants. Also, they have been here substantially longer than 10,000 years.
kaysandesses 1 year ago
@kaysandesses Just because you do not consider the native americans immigrants does not make it so - we know that all humans came originally from outside the americas so they are migrated here. I accept that the 10,000 years was a little short but the earliest artifacts indicate 18000 years as the earliest settlements in the americas.
johncrwarner 1 year ago
@johncrwarner Regardless of what *you* think, in the fields of anthropology and demography, aboriginal peoples are not considered immigrants. Keep on splitting hairs if you think it adds validity to your argument. Furthermore, there is much debate as to when humans first arrived in the Western Hemisphere, with some evidence pointing back as far as 50 kya. For the purposes of the present discussion, the timing of their arrival makes no difference.
kaysandesses 1 year ago
@kaysandesses As I don't generally live in quotation marks I was wondering why you put the word "you" inside them? Migration is the process of moving from one place to another to live. If you move from a place you are emigrating and if you arrive in a place you are immigrating. These words have additional meanings in the modern word - they are associated with legal status and paperwork - none of which applied to any of the peoples that arrived in the Americas. cont
johncrwarner 1 year ago
@johncrwarner The other problem is that there have been several waves of peoples into the Americas and the problem for the anthropologists and demographers is to ascertain who genuinely was the first to arrive as they are the only by their definition non-immigrants. Does not require the answer to that question and as far as I can see if not otherwise problematic for the study of human arrival and living in the Americas.
johncrwarner 1 year ago
@johncrwarner Split hairs if you like, it does nothing to further your argument.
kaysandesses 1 year ago
@kaysandesses And I await yours with eagerness - please show me where I am wrong - except your appeal to authority with no references and a couple of rogue quotation marks - which imply condescension on your part - but I could be wrong there.
johncrwarner 1 year ago
@johncrwarner I'll put my graduate degree in anthropology up against your simple insistence that Native Americans are considered immigrants by anthropologists. The fact that you claimed they have been here only 10,000 years demonstrates your overall lack of knowledge of the subject. I have neither the time, nor the inclination to educate you on the basics of the peopling of the New World.
kaysandesses 1 year ago
@kaysandesses First - I did not assert that anthropologists say - I say that they migrated to the Americas as we now know it and that is in everyday speech called immigration - I have never asserted anything about anthropologists and I have to say I am intrigued why anthropologists would be concerned about defining first arrivals and later arrivals - is anthropology the study of human societies - not their pre-history. Do theories hang on this notion of first arrivals versus immigrants?
johncrwarner 1 year ago
@kaysandesses 2) I agree that my knowledge of the arrival and archaelogy of the Americas is limited / non-existent - and I accept that people have been living in the Americas for longer than my first figure of 10 000 years. I am merely asserting that all people who migrate to a new place are immigrants - you disagree - and you offer no reasoning except appeals to authority - just quote a source except yourself that says this and I will endeavour to check it.
johncrwarner 1 year ago
@johncrwarner I would like to add that I have nothing personally against you as an individual. (btw, the quotation marks were in fact an asterisk before and after the word "you", and are intended to add emphasis as we would with italics, if only YouTube would support such things.)
Have a good day.
kaysandesses 1 year ago
@kaysandesses I did have a nice day - and am just about to go and teach English to my students on the summer course here in Germany in 30+ C (late 80s to early 90s Fahrenheit)
I am always curious why people end up defending positions - and most interestingly how they do so - you seem to have chosen to appeal to authority which is a very interesting choice.
I hope you have a pleasant day too.
johncrwarner 1 year ago
HAH!
xxxFaustusxxx 1 year ago
Why doesn't Arizona force their entire population to prove that they are citizens. White,black brown, everybody. Then following that all, new citizens must prove their citizenship. White,black or brown.
KasparHauser4 1 year ago 2
@KasparHauser4 That would need an ID card system and would cost a fortune and a huge growth in government - oh dear the rational response to the "illegal immigration crisis" would be in opposition to one of their other policies. They will therefore fudge this one.
johncrwarner 1 year ago
Got a great campaign ad idea: Wong is wrong!
This shit practically writes itself!
EscpdFrmPsykward 1 year ago 6