[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: maize in Europe and India: a twisted tale
Jeffrey L Baker (email@example.com) wrote:
: On 9 Jan 1997, Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
: > But did you see where Johannessen discusses maize pollen in his ECONOMIC
: > BOTANY article? He talks about new findings in cores from northern India.
: 1976, 1963 and 1966 are "new findings". These are the dates of the
: articles that Johannessen sites. Both the 1963 and 1966 study are based
: upon the same core (as Johannessen notes on p. 175, the authors of the
: 1966 report no longer feel that these grains necessarily represent maize).
: The 1976 article is by the same author as the 1963 dissertation. Is this
: a new core, or just a 13 year delay in publication? (I will check this
: out in a couple days, and provide a more thorough critique of the 1966
You're right, Jeffrey.
I just got hold of the article again and found these dates. Yes, it seems
like that evidence isn't new at all.
Those intriguing findings were published 30-20 years ago, and apparently
no one bothered to investigate them further. So what does this tell us?
No, it's not a conspiracy (perish the thought!), but it seems like the
lack of interest in confirming or disproving those old findings of Indian
maize pollen is indicative of academic lethargy and inertia at least to a
=O= Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto =O=
--- a webpage like any other... http://www.io.org/~yuku ---
We should always be disposed to believe that that which
appears white is really black, if the hierarchy of the
Church so decides === St. Ignatius of Loyola