In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. And promptly "discovered" a new world...one where plenty of people had already lived for thousands of years. What other "new worlds" did European explorers stumble upon during the Age of Discovery, like a college freshman discovering a keg stand?
Well, not that much, actually. By the time Europeans really started getting out in the world, in the 15th century, there weren't many truly uninhabited locales for them to find.
It's hard to out-snark Radical Cartography's Bill Rankin here:
Seems like maybe everyone is taking their semantics a little too seriously. Besides, discovery IS something that is viewed from the point of that person's or group's previous available knowledge. So in the case of Columbus (or Vespucci, or whomever we want to talk about), I believe he DID discover the New World. Neither he nor any of his people knew it existed, nor could have known. So to them it was a discovery.
If we used this infographic's definition, then we don't know for sure if those islands had been seen before by others, now do we?
Discovery is a point of view definition, and one very limited to what information is known in the future about every event that happened around the world. Did Wilhelm Röntgen really discover X-rays and X-ray imaging? Or did someone else previously do that, but we don't happen to currently know about it?
How about we give the explorers credit for keeping records of their discoveries.
The frogs had just then stepped out of their wells but then managed to keep good records of it.
It would be an awesome thing if popsci would actually "discover" objective popular scientific reporting. And drop this obnoxious, biased and condescending so called "snark."
Prior to 15,000 years ago, before the most recent ice age began to thaw, human skulls have been found in both North and south America that have typical skull shapes of those of typical Europeans of that time. While it used to be believe humans venture to the Americans only after ice age began to thaw, making an Alaska passage that old theory has been since been tossed out.
So . . . .
If intelligent Aliens from outer space came to earth and claimed they discovered earth, does that mean we're too stupid to claim to have discovered it ourselves?
Do you now see the absurdity of the word "Discovery"?
So where did all races came from? Europe? Are you saying Europe was the motherland of humanity? Perhaps you're not as smart as you think.
They didn't discover S***t.
They could get credit for a first visit. NOT DISCOVERY.
A a a, you're not from Earth are you?
Your comment is funny, thanks.
Haha, The United States, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, Australia and so many other countries and it's cities exist because of European explorers and settlers. Talk about a giant influence on history. Much more so then the natives of these lands. Even Americans, Australians speak English, Brazilians speak Portuguese, many Canadians speak French and Mexicans and many other countries speak Spanish.
Even the Chinese and US presidents still use European style suits still based on those going back centuries, the calander days named after Greek gods, the global timing systems that came from Europe, countries and cities amed after European explorers or the areas they came from. Even the name America. I could go on and on. To dismiss this world shaping influence is beyond insulting to history. Like dismissing evolution or global warming. Sad to downplay that.
Must i say even Obama is the result of white Europeans and the slaves they bought from African kings and rulers to work on the fields in the New World. Even popsci writers would not be alive today if it wasn't for European explorers and European settlers. Your bias is hypocritical to even your own existance.
White liberal guilt, Green.
Self-loathing and hatred of their ancestry. That's the explanation to their hatred of Christopher Columbus. Disparaging him as well as America, because of the fact that the founding fathers were all 'old, rich white European males.' And there's so many more examples that can be cited that poisons their minds, troubles their very existence as it does. It's truly sad that they've been indoctrinated to this, and unable to use logic and reason to rise above this filth.
"... ATLANTEANS IN AMERICA, Paleolithic Cro-Magnons in America, by R. Cedric Leonard
Barely thirty years ago experts in the field of American Archeology would not admit to the presence of man anywhere on the continents of North and South America earlier than 12,000 years ago. American Upper Paleolithic archeology was not a part of the curriculum in the universities of America. During a class in European Prehistoric Archeology at the University of Oklahoma under Dr. Robert Bell, we were informed of his participation in an important dig at Sandia Cave near Albuquerque, N.M. Although the lower level of occupation was clearly dated at 27,000 B.C. (Hibben, 1941), the experts refused to recognize it (Haynes & Agonino, 1986; Preston, 1995, et al.). Thirty years later things have changed somewhat. Site after site has been discovered in the Americas accumulating reliable dates back to roughly 40,000 years ago.
After reports of the existence of numerous cave paintings began surfacing in 1963, a survey was taken in 1970 of the Säo Raimundo Nonato region of Brazil. Follow up surveys in 1973 and 1975 turned up more than 100 decorated rock-shelters. Done mostly in red, yellow, black and white (with some gray), figures of deer, jaguars, armadillos, lizards, rheas, crabs, humans, trees, and various abstract signs have all been catalogued. Excavation of the sites was first initiated in 1978 by Brazilian archeologists from the Paulista Museum, lead by Niede Guidon of the University of Säo Paulo.
Today over 300 archeological sites have been discovered (most with rock art), captivating the interest of no less than 35 specialists in the fields of archaeology, geology, ecology, as well as other related disciplines. Säo Raimundo Nonato is described as lying "in one of the most beautiful and wild regions of South America." (Guidon, 1987) The natives call the region caat-inga, or "White Forest".
The region is littered with charcoal-containing hearths. "Charcoal samples from the hearths yielded a consistently ordered series of twelve carbon 14 dates that ranged from 32,000 to 17,000 years ago." (Ibid.) The most ancient dates were obtained from red marks found on chunks that fell from the rock walls, becoming embedded within layers dating from 32,000 to 27,000 years old. At another nearby cave, Toca do Sitio do Meio, artifacts dated from 15,000 to 12,000 years B.P. These discoveries alone illustrate that humans had been occuping South America at least as long as 32,000 years.
In 1991 Prof. Baffa from the Physics Department of the University of Säo Paulo at Ribeirao Preto, dated a layer of calcite that was covering two red anthropomorphic figures at the site of Toca da Bastiana. The calcite dated to 17,000 years old. (Guidon & Delibrias, 1986)
Even more recently Prof. Guidon noted that calcite was formed on rockwall paintings at least 36,000 years old. Such a figure reinforces the results obtained by archaeologists at Serra da Capivara (e.g. Pedra Furada.) using the C-14 method. (Guidon, La Salva, et al., 2003) This serves to push activities of human beings in Brazil back to at least 36,000 years ago.
The fact that prehistoric human activity seems to have taken place earlier in South America than in North America places the Bering Strait Only hypothesis in grave doubt. During an interview Guidon bravely supported the theory that certain prehistoric Europeans may have crossed the Atlantic Ocean to populate America—an idea which is gaining evidential support almost daily. (Bellos, 2000)
Archeologists are slowly beginning to realize that to understand American prehistory, European prehistory must also be considered. The Solutreans of Spain, and possibly the Magdalenians, are now believed to have crossed the Atlantic using the southern Equatorial current and to have entered the Caribbean arena 18,000-12,000 years ago. From there they continued onto the American continents, eventually spreading both north and south.
Dr. Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History in Washington, states: "We now know that human beings learned to sail 50,000 years before the present. Mankind settled in Australia then and it was not linked by any land bridge to Asia. It could only have been reached by boat. Clearly, we had mastered sailing tens of thousands of years before America was colonized, so we should not be surprised by the idea that people took boat trips across the Atlantic 18,000 years ago" (Stanford & Bradley, 2004)
Dr. Tom D. Dillehay (1999) of the University of Kentucky, writes: "It is likely that people arrived in the Southern Hemisphere no later than 15,000 to 14,000 years ago." One such site has been excavated at Monte Verde, Chile, 500 miles south of Santiago. Evidence was gathered and carefully analyzed over the last two decades by a team of American and Chilean archeologists led by Dillehay. Early in 2006 a group of archeologists, including several of Monte Verde's most rigorous critics, visited the site and inspected the artifacts, coming away totally convinced.
In his report of the site visit, Dr. Alex W. Barker, chief curator of the Dallas Museum of Natural History, said: "While there were very strongly voiced disagreements about different points, it rapidly became clear that everyone was in fundamental agreement about the most important question of all. Monte Verde is real. It's old. And it's a whole new ball game." And according to Michael B. Collins of the University of Texas at Austin, Monte Verde is "a bona fide archeological assemblage, it is very old, and it has profound implications for American prehistory." (Collins, 1999)... "
Leftists will always complain about Europeans colonizing the Americas, but what they ignore is the fact that overall the Europeans improved the standard of living of the native populations. The natives had been living a mostly primitive existence for thousands of years, where violence and tribal conflict were a way of life. If the Europeans had never come to the Americas, the native populations would still be living in the primitive conditions that had existed for the previous thousand years.
I agree with your comment. So what do you think of the middle eastern tribes that continue to war with themselves and the world, despite all world advancement in civilizations. They are so often fighting to preserve a one tribes leaders point of view over another, that their whole social culture, religious culture and family culture never gets past on, but killed and eliminated. In my opinion that are standard for being their own worst enemy for preserving their past and growing towards the future as a civilization. In modern times with their past on social disrupted anger and warring, now they war with the world and the only thing here they accomplish is a local upsetting of a foreign nation, while its own culture continues, but that foreign nation responds and makes more of a mess of their own mess up disturbed angry culture.
"...DNA research Discover's that Europeans discovered the Americas 17,000 years prior to the birth of Columbus.
Contrary to the Ice Age Columbus DVD, traditional history tells us that European settlers discovered America about the time of the Renaissance. But revolutionary new archaeological data and the latest DNA research reveal that Europeans visited our shores far earlier -- some 17,000 years before Columbus was even born.
Today Anthropologist Archaeologist and Geneticist all agree the Solutreans( sometimes referred to as ethnic Japhethites) were the first in North America.
Archaeologist and RNA specialist also agree North America broke off of the side of Europe, and that South America broke off of the side of Africa.
According to the Bible, Ethnic-Japhethites were the first to North America. Today archeologist call these Indigenous-Americans (Solutreans).
The RNA of the plants in North America are related to the RNA plant species found in Europe, not Asia.
The RNA found in plants in South America are the closest related to RNA in plant life found in Western Africa... "
Someone sees a rare new ape - but does not recognize its difference. Someone else comes along and sees it, identifies it, and has found a new species.
Someone sees a rare new ape - but is illiterate and cannot describe it in writing. The person dies without proof of the new species. Someone else comes along and records the find - and has found a new species.
Someone lives on land, with no written language, no real cartography, and the culture dies out. Someone else comes along, finds the land, measures and maps it, and writes down its name and position.
Who found that land?
I get that there were already humans on most of the planet's landmass by the 1400s - but the discovery of new lands by people capable of mapping and indirect (written) continuation of knowledge are the ones who "found" it - reguardless of the presence of sub-cultural homosapiens.
In other words, the first person to the car isn't who gets the front seat - you also have to be able to make a claim of "shotgun."
Considering the age of the Earth and the age of modern primates there are no new real original ideas, but rather rediscover of old knowledge and ideas thought about before and yes the same can be said for land or ocean....
It is said modern mad primate has been around for 100k years and the Americas may of been discover 20k or less. So what has humanity been up to for the 80k prior and what of the ancient primates before then with old age of Earth?
My guess those ancients who had the knowledge to build the pyramids and monolithic sights we see around the world and the blacksmith and smelting abilities to create block holding ties, also had the ability to build wooden ships and sail around the world too. Though with such a great passage of time, the wooden ships decayed and disappeared from our present view.