Jat

Well, the American Government did give natives blankets infected with, I think, Smallpox. One of the earliest reports of germ warfare. They may not have practiced overt genocide, but they did make the native's lives harder than they should have been.

Sakpo

Here's a good link.

The evidence for The Holocaust is overwhelming, and anyone somewhat familiar with basic science, logic, and the basic practices of historiography ought to be able to see right through holocaust deniers deceptions.

Misso

On the "New World holocaust": I've read and hear numbers of 100 million people living in the New World before Spaniards came and only some 10 million surviving about a century later. Generally it is assumed that some 90% of the natives died, the actual number of people is debated.


Denying the holocaust is foolishness. There has been no single event in human history that has been as well-documented as the holocaust. The Germans themselves meticulously logged everything that happened to everyone. Some people just won't believe it though, and wouldn't even believe it if they had seen it all with their own eyes.

Born Free

I hate holocaust deniers with a passion.

Mageth

The New World is North, Central, and South America.

Yes, I was aware of that. But you left out the West Indies.

The lands here were hardly empty, they were just not exploited as Europeans think land should be used.

And yes, I was also aware of that.

I got it from watching documentraries about the history of the "New World" on such channels of Discovery (Canadian), TLC, and A&E.

I would be more interested in actual research sources than "hearsay" from a TV program.

Anyway, I did a little research on my own and discovered that some claim the pre-columbian population of the Americas to be upwards of 100 million. You learn something new every day, I guess.

However, there appears to be a large range of estimates of the "New World" population at the time of Columbus; in any event, we don't know how many inhabitants there were for sure. So a more correct statement would perhaps be along the lines of "Estimates on the total population of the Americas at the time of Columbus range from <low estimate, which some claim is 5-8 million> to <high estimate; upwards of 100 million>."

So the bottom line is we don't know for sure. I think both the low and high estimates are questionable. 50-60 million seems to be the consensus estimated range, based on my bit of web research. 50-60 million is a lot more than 16 million, obviously, and is in line with estimates I'd heard before.

Here's what's supposed to be a good book, perhaps the definitive book, on the subject:

Denevan, William M., editor 1992
The Native Population of the Americas in 1492.
University of Wisconsin Press, Madison

Amazon link for the book

Mageth

Generally it is assumed that some 90% of the natives died

I've heard estimates as high as 100%.

beyelzu

actually, if I am not mistaken there are only a few documented cases of this occurring. and again iirc it was prerevolution. so it wasnt the american government. it was the royal government. the earliest report of germ warfare is actually ancient greece


from http://www.acs.ohio-state.edu/histor...l/biologic.htm

Jat

Originally posted by Mageth

The New World is North, Central, and South America.

Yes, I was aware of that. But you left out the West Indies.

Aren't they part of the North American plate?

I would be more interested in actual research sources than "hearsay" from a TV program.

Not a "TV Program" but a documentary on a science/education channel. So, that would be much more than "hearsay".

Anyway, I did a little research on my own and discovered that some claim the pre-columbian population of the Americas to be upwards of 100 million. You learn something new every day, I guess.

However, there appears to be a large range of estimates of the "New World" population at the time of Columbus; in any event, we don't know how many inhabitants there were for sure. So a more correct statement would perhaps be along the lines of "Estimates on the total population of the Americas at the time of Columbus range from <low estimate, which some claim is 5-8 million> to <high estimate; upwards of 100 million>."

So the bottom line is we don't know for sure. I think both the low and high estimates are questionable. 50-60 million seems to be the consensus estimated range, based on my bit of web research. 50-60 million is a lot more than 16 million, obviously, and is in line with estimates I'd heard before.

Here's what's supposed to be a good book, perhaps the definitive book, on the subject:

Denevan, William M., editor 1992
The Native Population of the Americas in 1492.
University of Wisconsin Press, Madison

Amazon link for the book

It is still alot more than 16 million.

Mageth

Aren't they part of the North American plate?

I don't think they're considered part of either continent. But that's not important; it was just a little good-natured jab on my part. Hence the winky smilie.

Not a "TV Program" but a documentary on a science/education channel. So, that would be much more than "hearsay".

Well, last time I checked that still qualifies as a TV program. And I've seen a lot of schlock and pseudo-science on "science/education" channels, BTW (not saying that the program you saw was such, it's just that it's there).

And the "hearsay" comes in that it's an unreferenced, second-hand claim on your part. You don't even say what documentary or what channel. I don't really doubt that you did hear it, but real references to support such claims are generally considered good form in such a discussion.

Obviously, I was able to spend 10 minutes and find the info for myself, though I never found the "80 million" number claimed (Like I said, I don't really doubt that someone's made that claim).

It is still alot more than 16 million.

Do I hear an echo? I said in the post that "50-60 million is a lot more than 16 million, obviously, and is in line with estimates I'd heard before. "

Jimmy Higgins

Are those 3 as of right now, legitimate deniers or just fake votes?