It seems that Gavin Menzies is not the only person who claims that the Chinese discovered the Americas before Columbus.Paul Chiasson, a Toronto architect and amateur archeologist, claims that some ruins at Cape Breton are indeed due to Chinese navigators who circumnavigated around Africa and came to Cape Breton and settled there. He claims that Mi'kmaq natives were culturally influenced by those alleged Chinese navigators too.He published a book called The Island of the Seven Cities: Where the Chinese settled when they discovered America furthering his claim. Here is the Amazon summary and reviews.A web site for the book is here. What is ironic is that Chiasson has contacted Gavin Menzies and worries that his work is lumped with Menzies and both being described as fiction, just like Geoff Wade did for both. More rebuttal of the book can be found in the 1421 Exposed web site by various experts. Five provincial archeologists have refuted Chiasson's claims in this CBC article agreeing that there is no evidence of human settlement in the area, Chinese or otherwise.
- Family
- Friends
- Nokat نكت
- Writings
- Technology
- Places
- Interests
- Miscellany
Comments
Chick Hurst (not verified)
pseudoscience Paul Chaisson
Sun, 2013/12/08 - 01:32If Paul Chaisson is wrong, then prove it. Just saying he is wrong does not make it so. As Gavin Menzies states in his books, that you have mentioned, "do your own research." It is very easy to make a claim and a counter claim but, if the researcher is wrong then it must be provable. What it is looking like is that there are some people who still have an arrogant or prejudicial mind set toward anyone suggesting something outside of what has been taught. Just as no one ever mentions the real reason why Columbus went to the Americas and why he slaughtered so many people, our religionists, historians, governments and even scientists, have lied to us on numerous occasions. Why should we believe the stories we were told in elementary school? There is plenty of published science to prove that things just did not happen the way we were taught. So, where is the proof? Unless there is actual proof to the contrary, it just might be wise to not say anything, weather it is an archeologist or any other scientist.
Khalid
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof ...
Fri, 2013/12/20 - 12:04Science does not work this way.
The burden of proof is on the person(s) putting forward the new theory. They have to come up with evidence for their theory, and explanations for the contradictory evidence.
This is why there is peer review, so that the over the top wacko theories do not slip through and become accepted.
Paul Chiasson could be right. After all the Viking settlement of the east has proven that Europeans reached North America before Columbus. However, there is archeological and historical evidence for that. Until Paul comes up with such evidence, his proposition is not science.
Anonymous (not verified)
Here's a dumb question. Where
Tue, 2014/08/26 - 20:11Here's a dumb question. Where are the other 6 cities?
Also, the legend of the island of a seven cities didn't come from reports of someone finding it. It came from a story of 7 Christian bishops fleeing the Muslim conquest of Spain and settling on an Island. It has nothing to do with Chinese. The tying of these maps claiming to have found the legendary island to Chinese settlement seems more like a person attempting to snatch what ever he can to fit a very loose theory.
I don't see any evidence at all and much of what is put forth seems to have a number of more plausible explainations.
I can't pretend to have much knowledge on the subject and although it's clear the Chinese had the ability, the likelihood that they bypassed the places those same currents took Columbus only to reach this legendary island their legends knew nothing of seems out there to me.
Anonymous (not verified)
Prove it wrong
Tue, 2014/08/26 - 19:56There is nothing at all quantifiable in his theory and therefore nothing to be disproved.
Anonymous (not verified)
The island of 7 cities
Mon, 2015/10/12 - 09:37Perhaps you all need to read Farley Mowats book, " The Farfarers" . Perhaps this is an Alban settlement , and a lot older than previosly thought.
henri Loiselle (not verified)
European or ... Chinese! DNA in Mi'kmaq natives
Thu, 2015/11/12 - 14:47I would love to see if there is European DNA or even Chinese DNA in the descendants of the Mi'Qmaq natives. In fact I would love to see a DNA study of the east coast native population. The recent showing of a documentary I saw about the possible Chinese settlement on Cap Bretton made me think that a DNA study would be very helpful. DNA "migration" study would be incredibly useful in acquiring positive information about the human relocation and integration. This would help dispel or help to prove what may have only been a myth. If there was a Chinese settlement on Cape Bretton, perhaps some of the population may have been integrated into the Mi'kmaq. and subsequently DNA would have been transferred.... The Portuguese have been a seafaring nation for centuries and it is not inconceivable that they may have integrated into the Mohawk(or other ) population.... lets look into this.. Also the west coast native population, all the way down to Chile had probably been inundated by Polynesian sailers. I would love to see the myth that all natives of the north and south americas all came from over an ice bridge in the Bering Sea.
Paul Chiasson's theory that there must have been a Chinese settlement on CapBretton would quickly gain merit if such a study did find that DNA was found amongst the Mi'Kmaq.
Just Saying...
Henri Loiselle
Ronald Ryan, DA... (not verified)
Chinese in North America
Thu, 2016/03/03 - 14:57Add me, also, as arguing that the Chinese were in North America, this time in Newfoundland. I have a 50 page document, just finished, that provides the argument and the evidence. In my opinion, there is do doubt. I began with the thesis: The Beothuck, the Aboriginal inhabitants of the Island of Newfoundland at the time of European discovery were substantially Chinese or had significant Chinese contact. I took every piece of evidence available on the Beothuck and tested it against that thesis. Every piece of information (evidence) SUPPORTS THE THESIS. I AM NOT AWARE OF A SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT IS EVEN NEUTRAL, LET ALONE INCONSISTENT WITH THAT THESIS!
Stan Johnson (not verified)
chinese dna in mi'kmaq people here
Tue, 2017/09/12 - 10:54I had a chat with an eye doctor here in Cape Breton who has a few Mi'kmaq patients, he claims that he has three patients here in Cape Breton and his colleagues have a few in New Brunswick that have Mi'kmaq patients that have this rare eye disorder that only affects Asian people. Explain that??
Khalid
Can be explained
Tue, 2017/09/12 - 12:06Well, with no specifics it is hard to evaluate whether this is an independent mutation (called convergent evolution), or the exact same mutation.
A similar case is how people living in high altitudes have adaptations for low oxygen. But the two main populations that have these adaptations developed this independently. So the people of the high Andes and the people of Tibet both adapt to low oxygen, but in very different ways.
The Indigenous people of North America are all from east Asia, and they crossed the Bering Strait some 12,000 or 13,000 years ago, in one or more waves. The modern Chinese are very close to the same area, and encompass several ethnic groups (the Han being the largest and more dominant, but there are others).
So it is not surprising that a gene in Indigenous people would be also found in some Chinese people.
Pages