Comments on: Mauna Kea, NAGPRA, and science’s “turn back toward the dark ages”

By: John Cunningham

John Cunningham — Fri, 24 Oct 2014 02:20:08 +0000

Our party rulers only like “science” when it is used to cudgel Christianity. otherwise, “science’ gives way to anti-white obscurantism and worship of primitive tribal cults.

By: Jross

Jross — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 19:40:49 +0000

The 3rd Circuit ruled on a NAGPRA case today

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/132446p.pdf

By: ras

ras — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 18:42:18 +0000

Confirmation is now a science. Only a confirmation denier could say otherwise.

By: Jonathan W

Jonathan W — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:29:49 +0000

No, I think he meant “reparations”, in the sense of making amends for past wrongs.

By: Walter Olson

Walter Olson — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:29:02 +0000

Although “repatriations” might seem like the likely word, the scientist quoted in the NYT piece was using “reparations” and that makes sense in context: the sacrifice being demanded goes beyond particular tangible items of real or personal property once held by the tribes.

By: Peter K.

Peter K. — Thu, 23 Oct 2014 14:04:24 +0000

I think you wrote “reparations” where you meant “repatriations”.