The Constitution. And shit.

[RDJ]

"Generally accepted" is not proof .. it was once generally accepted that the earth was flat .. and that human beings could not travel at speeds greateer that 30mph .. because they would never get enough oxygen adn would die ... and so on ...

The bones werre found in caves with evidence of cooking fires ... and cooking marks on the bones.

It's frequently said that people who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

It's less frequently said, but maybe it should be more often pointed out, that people who dwell in the past do not progress in the present.

[oneofsix]

It's frequently said that people who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat its mistakes.

It's less frequently said, but maybe it should be more often pointed out, that people who dwell in the past do not progress in the present.

Then there is Henry Ford's position; All history is bunk.

[Oscar]

"Generally accepted" is not proof .. it was once generally accepted that the earth was flat .. and that human beings could not travel at speeds greateer that 30mph .. because they would never get enough oxygen adn would die ... and so on ...

The bones werre found in caves with evidence of cooking fires ... and cooking marks on the bones.

I have no problem with the concept of earlier visitors.
It's just that they weren't settlers (which blows your 2,000 year legal system away), and they may not have been "Maori".

[Banditbandit]

From the Te Ara website:

New Zealand has a shorter human history than any other country. The precise date of settlement is a matter of debate, but current understanding is that the first arrivals came from East Polynesia in the 13th century. It was not until 1642 that Europeans became aware the country existed.

I'll see what I can find for you .. but start here .. this article says that there is evidence of human occupation below the ash deposits left by the Kaharoa Eruption in 1050 .. an that gthe evidence above this ash layer shows a decrease in population .. that's certain prior to the 13th century .. http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu...pdf?sequence=1

It also says that there is no evidence of human occupation below the Taupo ash layer, and that eruption was 200 AD ... not quite 2,000 years ago ...

The pacific rat (kiore) spread with voyaging humans; therefore, its earliest presence in New Zealand indicates initial human contact. Radiocarbon dating of kiore bones suggests they were introduced to New Zealand c. ad 100 (Holdaway, 1996 Nature). http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/sc.../human-arrival

SlIghtly older ... so the kiore arrived here (on waka ) in 100 AD ... with the people paddling the waka .. so that would be 1913 years ago ..

[Akzle]

My great grandfather was a full blooded Ngapuhi paramount chief around Whangarei and he was said to be desended from the old people.

holy fuck we're cousins.

i'm not sure who that should be scarier for...

[Oscar]

I'll see what I can find for you .. but start here .. this article says that there is evidence of human occupation below the ash deposits left by the Kaharoa Eruption in 1050 .. an that gthe evidence above this ash layer shows a decrease in population .. that's certain prior to the 13th century .. http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu...pdf?sequence=1

It also says that there is no evidence of human occupation below the Taupo ash layer, and that eruption was 200 AD ... not quite 2,000 years ago ...



SlIghtly older ... so the kiore arrived here (on waka ) in 100 AD ... with the people paddling the waka .. so that would be 1913 years ago ..

So they dropped their rats off when visiting.
Show me settlement, and we'll talk about your 2,000 year old legal system..

[Winston001]

I'll see what I can find for you .. but start here .. this article says that there is evidence of human occupation below the ash deposits left by the Kaharoa Eruption in 1050 ..

It also says that there is no evidence of human occupation below the Taupo ash layer, and that eruption was 200 AD ... not quite 2,000 years ago ...



SlIghtly older ... so the kiore arrived here (on waka ) in 100 AD ... with the people paddling the waka .. so that would be 1913 years ago ..

Well that is interesting but to date the most recent archaeological evidence of Maori living in NZ comes from the Wairau Bar near Blenheim which dates about AD1300.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7954...old-Maori-home

Really I'm not bothered if ancient Pacific voyagers discovered Aotearoa much earlier as you suggest. Humans have explored for 200,000 years and its always possible a group stumbled across these remote islands earlier than 1300. However that begs the question as to why such explorers didn't occupy Australia multiple times yet the DNA evidence shows the Aboriginals came from Indonesia.

[Coolz]

Well, as you have opened this can of worms...off the top of my head;
The Kaimanawa wall
The stone village in the Waipoua forrest
The tamil bell discovered by Colenso in Whangarei
The spanish helmet found in the Wellington Harbour
400 year old Pohutakawa tree in Spain
The tons of bones found in caves near Warkworth that the Maori claimed were not of their people and subsequnetly got destroyed at the Onehunga limeworks
Maurice Tyson's discovery of a 7 foot tall skeleton in Tuakau
The carving found in the Kaipara dunes, now in the Dargaville marine museum
Ancient stone houses in Southland
and many more mysterious finds that the goverment and the Maori are closed mouthed about

Evidence would suggest that other races of people have visited our shores and possibly dined on Moa.

[Banditbandit]

My great grandfather was a full blooded Ngapuhi paramount chief around Whangarei and he was said to be desended from the old people.

He would of seen his history as being longer than 1000 years.

Just saying.

Yes. Exactly. Many places have stories of the peope who lived here before the waka arrived .. and yes, there was intermarriage .. heaps of it .. just as there has been with the more recent arrivals - Europeans, Chinese, Indian ... other Pacific Islandrs ...

I have no problem with the concept of earlier visitors.
It's just that they weren't settlers (which blows your 2,000 year legal system away), and they may not have been "Maori".

It's too far to come for a "visit" anyone who arrived here was basically stuck ... Were these people "Māori" .. Hmm .. As I have said before, and as can be found if you look .. the people who arrived here pre-European settlement were Pacific Islanders - the cultural that developed here was Māori .. No Māori arrived here .. they develooped here as Māori ... these people are our ancestors ...

Your question is actually quite hard to answer because say 30 people arriving here on a waka 2,000 years ago had 66 million acres to roam around - and would leave a very minimal archeological footprint - if any at all - and therefore hard to find.

The world is NOT a giant storage shed with stuff lying around just waiting for us to find it. The world is a giant recycling machine - and a wood or stone-based economy leaves a minimal archeological footprint. There are areas in North America where recorded European history writes about a 100,000 Indians living there .. but today there is no archeological footprint of those people (talk about environmentally friendly - 100,000 leaving no marks on the environment) .. and that is only after 500 years ..

The presence of the kiore proves humans got here (kiore can't swim for shit .. have to have come on waka) ... do you seriously think that after sailing al this way they were just on holiday ???

[Oscar]

It's too far to come for a "visit" anyone who arrived here was basically stuck ... Were these people "Māori" .. Hmm .. As I have said before, and as can be found if you look .. the people who arrived here pre-European settlement were Pacific Islanders - the cultural that developed here was Māori .. No Māori arrived here .. they develooped here as Māori ... these people are our ancestors ...

Your question is actually quite hard to answer because say 30 people arriving here on a waka 2,000 years ago had 66 million acres to roam around - and would leave a very minimal archeological footprint - if any at all - and therefore hard to find.

The world is NOT a giant storage shed with stuff lying around just waiting for us to find it. The world is a giant recycling machine - and a wood or stone-based economy leaves a minimal archeological footprint. There are areas in North America where recorded European history writes about a 100,000 Indians living there .. but today there is no archeological footprint of those people (talk about environmentally friendly - 100,000 leaving no marks on the environment) .. and that is only after 500 years ..

The presence of the kiore proves humans got here (kiore can't swim for shit .. have to have come on waka) ... do you seriously think that after sailing al this way they were just on holiday ???

I'm not disputing the presence of people here 2,000 years ago, or the possiblity of visitors who settled and probably died out (like early Eurpean settlers in North America).

I am disputing your claim that "Our laws have existed here for 2,000 years ...", as it infers that Maori have been settled here for that long and it flies in the face of all research.
Notwithstanding that, the length of time a legal system has been in place does not guarantee quality, equity or anything much at all. By that logic, Sharia Law would be OK as it’s been around for 12 centuries.

[Akzle]

Notwithstanding that, the length of time a legal system has been in place does not guarantee quality, equity or anything much at all. By that logic, Sharia Law would be OK as it’s been around for 12 centuries.

it'd be a league ahead of white crown "law"

[scissorhands]

Well, as you have opened this can of worms...off the top of my head;
The Kaimanawa wall
The stone village in the Waipoua forrest
The tamil bell discovered by Colenso in Whangarei
The spanish helmet found in the Wellington Harbour
400 year old Pohutakawa tree in Spain
The tons of bones found in caves near Warkworth that the Maori claimed were not of their people and subsequnetly got destroyed at the Onehunga limeworks
Maurice Tyson's discovery of a 7 foot tall skeleton in Tuakau
The carving found in the Kaipara dunes, now in the Dargaville marine museum
Ancient stone houses in Southland
and many more mysterious finds that the goverment and the Maori are closed mouthed about

Evidence would suggest that other races of people have visited our shores and possibly dined on Moa.

Alternative archaeology is an interest fro me too, and a sleeper political issue.

Yet, little traction could be obtained from any possible early settler claims, and only novelty could be obtained, when referencing the impact of these early settlers upon any constitutional document.

Deep excavation under 4-5meters in volcanic zones are bringing up infrequent finds from 10,000yrs ago even

Maybe NZ was abandoned but not likely. Maybe it never took off, but more likely Maori just dealt to them.

Its a winning evolutionary trait, so might becomes right

[Coldrider]

it'd be a league ahead of 15/16th white crown "law"

fixed it for you.

[Akzle]

disregard that, i suck cocks

fixed it for you.

[Coldrider]

I don't swallow my 1/16th.

fixed that for you.