Kennewick man

[Mara]

A federal appeals court declined Monday to reconsider its February decision allowing scientists to resume testing on a 9,000-year-old skeleton — called “Kennewick Man” — despite protests from American Indian tribes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4787844/

Do you agree or disagree with the court ruling?

[Terry Penrod]

.

I agree 100%.

Our need to know exactly where we came from and how we evolved is vital if mankind is ever to solve his greatest mysteries (our true origins / the real nature of man) and finally put to rest some of our most contentious questions.

Shunning the honest pursuit of crucial human knowledge for the sake of religious tradition or sentimentality is a false path that leads nowhere. Seeking the truth is how we dispel ingrained, often counter-productive myths and advance as a species.

Cheers, Terry

.

[Torsion]

Shunning the honest pursuit of crucial human knowledge for the sake of religious tradition or sentimentality is a false path that leads nowhere. Seeking the truth is how we dispel ingrained, often counter-productive myths and advance as a species.

Possibly true, but how do you define the honest pursuit of crutial human knowledge? I believe this is a case of weighing the possible benifits of such an excavation with the preservation and respect for tradition and the sanctity of a burial.

After all, is this skeleton part of something we in the United States own? How can you justify the invasion into another cuture to remove something that rightfully belongs to them in the first place? In my opinion, the immoratlity of the whole situation far outweights the possible scientific benefit of claiming such a sacred and important local relic.

By an extension of your logic, would it also be ok for forieners from some other country to come and dig up george washington's grave (if he has one) and export it back to their country on the premise of scientific investigation? Its all a question of morals really.

[Terry Penrod]

.

Possibly true, but how do you define the honest pursuit of crutial human knowledge? I believe this is a case of weighing the possible benifits of such an excavation with the preservation and respect for tradition and the sanctity of a burial.

After all, is this skeleton part of something we in the United States own? How can you justify the invasion into another cuture to remove something that rightfully belongs to them in the first place? In my opinion, the immoratlity of the whole situation far outweights the possible scientific benefit of claiming such a sacred and important local relic.

By an extension of your logic, would it also be ok for forieners from some other country to come and dig up george washington's grave (if he has one) and export it back to their country on the premise of scientific investigation? Its all a question of morals really.


Uh okay but obviously you didn't even bother to read the above linked article and don't know anything about this skeleton or the circumstances under which it was found several years ago.

You see, it was never buried in a sacred site or even a crude grave. It was discovered by two teenagers lying near the shore of a river out in the open - and NOT on an indian reservation or any other restricted or holy property.

This was a pure chance discovery that has in fact been an important paleontological find which merits further scientific study - studies that are more than justified legally, morally and ethically. When those experiments are complete and we have learned all we possibly can from these ancient human remains, then as far as I'm concerned the bones can either go to a proper museum or be turned over to the distant descendants (after all it is estimated to be around 9,000 years old) that claim "ownership" and who want to give them a proper burial. Either way is fine with me - just as long as mankind benefits for this discovery first.

Cheers, Terry

.

[Shardos]

I understand our need to learn more about our history, but I personally think that running tests on the skeleton dishonors the dead. He should be given a rightful burial.

[Terry Penrod]

.

I understand our need to learn more about our history, but I personally think that running tests on the skeleton dishonors the dead. He should be given a rightful burial.


Sorry Shardos but ancient human skeletal remains, related artifacts and the settings the were discovered in are the ONLY physical evidence we have that can possibly lead to conclusive answers about our true, natural / biological origins as a species, the details of our earliest developmental history as a society and all subsequent changes that first spawned distinctly different homo sapien sub-species (races), a multitude of cultures and everything else that grew out of the initial steps we took on this planet. Failing to study them at every opportunity would be a real disservice to the entire species - especially for the sake of pure sentimentality or worse, excused by timid thinking, fear of the truth or myopia resulting from cloistered, religious blinders.

If you believe that God created man in his own image, then you must also believe that he instilled in us his most amazing qualities - bold creativity, irrepressible curiosity and an immeasurable imagination. So looking the truth straight in the eyes and always seeking more answers to our most important questions should not only be second nature to us but also serve as our consistent guideline for how to conduct ourselves in this universe. And thus, anything that impedes that process is simply counter to man's nature, to the very purpose we were given by our creator in the first place.

On the other hand, if you do not truly believe in any of the above, then why should you care one way or the other what some scientist does with a 9,000 year-old bag of bones in some isolated lab somewhere?

Cheers, Terry

.

[Mara]

I believe that what makes us who we are has nothing to do with our remains. Different religions, of course, believe otherwise, but for me, when I'm dead, what is me doesn't remain with my body. I'm gone. Where, it depends on your beliefs. It doesn't matter, except perhaps, to my family what happens to my remains. For them, it's a matter of closure or of preserving some part of me.

A skeleton to me isn't sacred. It's an artefact. The person it represented is gone and won't be harmed by anything that is done to it's remains. The respect a person is due, should be shown to the living person. The remains don't need that respect.

Just my feelings.

[Cloudw4lker]

personally if I was deadI wouldn't care what happened to my body.

[Torsion]

Uh okay but obviously you didn't even bother to read the above linked article and don't know anything about this skeleton or the circumstances under which it was found several years ago.

You see, it was never buried in a sacred site or even a crude grave. It was discovered by two teenagers lying near the shore of a river out in the open - and NOT on an indian reservation or any other restricted or holy property.

This was a pure chance discovery that has in fact been an important paleontological find which merits further scientific study - studies that are more than justified legally, morally and ethically. When those experiments are complete and we have learned all we possibly can from these ancient human remains, then as far as I'm concerned the bones can either go to a proper museum or be turned over to the distant descendants (after all it is estimated to be around 9,000 years old) that claim "ownership" and who want to give them a proper burial. Either way is fine with me - just as long as mankind benfits for this discovery first.

Cheers, Terry


Ahh Ok, I never read the actual arcticle, just the blurb from the initial post. I was unaware of the actual circumstances that they found the person in. I suppose I can understand your perspective much more now than I did before.

[Shardos]

eh it's not even views of god, I just don't like messing with dead people

[Gary V.]

Hell, he's dead, he doesn't care. What about the advances made in medicine due to the study of cadavers? Once you're dead, your soul goes on and what's left is meat.

[Terry Penrod]

.

eh it's not even views of god, I just don't like messing with dead people


But what about that super nifty Turn Undead cleric spell that we all use to turn the tides of battle in the most nightmarish dungeons? Without it, we'd be screwed half the time.

Cheers, Terry

.