Linda
03-07-2002, 11:12 PM
I said earlier that I was glad it was our bro' Itconani who brought up a lot of the arguments against the Blackfoot/Saponi connection that I'd never heard before.
Since then I've heard more of this skepticism. Basically, it's an opinion that the Blackfoot ID is really just something people cooked up to either cover up or glamorize African heritage.
Somebody or other has published on a genforum somewhere that I've done some interesting research but haven't proved my case yet and then he went into this litany about the African cover up theory.
So I've been thinking about that and it kind of annoys me that I'm being required to offer up more proof. Like I've said before, I've got more than enough proof to justify being a dutiful granddaughter and trusting what my grandmother said. I fully intend to live out my days as a fully enfranchised, native born American citizen and don't have to prove nothing to nobody, least of all something I believe.
Why should I have to do any more work for this dude? Why isn't HE being required to offer some proof?
So here's the Blackfoot challenge. If you hold the above opinion, please, go out, do some research and PROVE to us in a coherent, logical, well documented way that out of say, 100 thoroughly researched family trees with the Blackfoot ID, 95% of them were definitely NOT Saponi descended (whether they know it or not) while definitely of African descent. That sample must include a proportionate share of the thousands of "white" Blackfoot ID'd people in Appalachia and the Ozarks. This of course means, that first, you must survey the exact percentage of Blackfoot ID'd families who are "white" and those who are "black." When you get all that footwork done and have all your facts together, meet me back here and I'll see what I can pick apart of your hard work and effort.
To me, the African Blackfoot theory smacks of some antiquated, bigoted old wives' tale people enjoyed telling each other because it enabled them to ridicule others. So I dare ya, PROVE I'm wrong and that this opinion is based on sound logic and clear documentation -- an easily reproduced conclusion based on scientific fact.
Oh what's that you say? You have a life to live and don't have time for all that? Well, you know the expression, put up or shut up? Sounds like a plan to me.
Since then I've heard more of this skepticism. Basically, it's an opinion that the Blackfoot ID is really just something people cooked up to either cover up or glamorize African heritage.
Somebody or other has published on a genforum somewhere that I've done some interesting research but haven't proved my case yet and then he went into this litany about the African cover up theory.
So I've been thinking about that and it kind of annoys me that I'm being required to offer up more proof. Like I've said before, I've got more than enough proof to justify being a dutiful granddaughter and trusting what my grandmother said. I fully intend to live out my days as a fully enfranchised, native born American citizen and don't have to prove nothing to nobody, least of all something I believe.
Why should I have to do any more work for this dude? Why isn't HE being required to offer some proof?
So here's the Blackfoot challenge. If you hold the above opinion, please, go out, do some research and PROVE to us in a coherent, logical, well documented way that out of say, 100 thoroughly researched family trees with the Blackfoot ID, 95% of them were definitely NOT Saponi descended (whether they know it or not) while definitely of African descent. That sample must include a proportionate share of the thousands of "white" Blackfoot ID'd people in Appalachia and the Ozarks. This of course means, that first, you must survey the exact percentage of Blackfoot ID'd families who are "white" and those who are "black." When you get all that footwork done and have all your facts together, meet me back here and I'll see what I can pick apart of your hard work and effort.
To me, the African Blackfoot theory smacks of some antiquated, bigoted old wives' tale people enjoyed telling each other because it enabled them to ridicule others. So I dare ya, PROVE I'm wrong and that this opinion is based on sound logic and clear documentation -- an easily reproduced conclusion based on scientific fact.
Oh what's that you say? You have a life to live and don't have time for all that? Well, you know the expression, put up or shut up? Sounds like a plan to me.