Comments on: Satire, self-parody and court jesters

By: Jonathan Dresner

Jonathan Dresner — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:12:17 +0000

You are very naive to believe that Mr Chaisson is writing this book as a parody

Prof. Goodman was, himself, writing in a satirical vein. The purpose is to show that Menzies’ and Chaisson’s ideas are so ridiculous that they can only be considered a kind of self-parodic act.

If the commenters here were actually Mr. Chiasson or a “sock puppet” persona, I’d expect a much more vigorous and detailed defense.

By: Robert Thompson

Robert Thompson — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:01:16 +0000

I also have to wonder how many of the responses that are supporting this notion are written by Chiasson and his cronies! I see the same argument put forth in the comments. There is no great FEAR that the Chinese may have discovered North America, any more than the fact that the Portuguese fishermen have been here since the 14th century. It is much more due to the fact that the Chinese have no written, verbal or physical history of such a great accomplishment. Good luck on your battle, Mr Chiasson!

By: Robert Thompson

Robert Thompson — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:55:34 +0000

You are very naive to believe that Mr Chaisson is writing this book as a parody or to poke fun at Mr Menzies or the Chinese notion. He has taken this very seriously and while totally ill informed and poorly researched (I also live in this area), there is a strong movement to claim this as fact. In fact, there are many people making moeny off of this notion and a tv show is in the works. People will do anything to sell books and make money even if it means distorting facts and twisting history. Wake up, people!

By: L

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 05:58:45 +0000

Why is it that you never hear input from any of the local Native peoples in any matter concerning all these bunk theories of outsiders settling among the Native folk? It seems that in the quest to one up the other, both Westerners and non-Westerners (Afrocentrics, Sinocentrics, etc.) care little about Native input unless it corroborates their agenda. After all, Natives are too brutish and ignorant to have created any type of structure above a hut, right? Fortunately, some Natives have given their input and it points to “No, no foreigners came to settle here.”

By: Jonathan Dresner

Jonathan Dresner — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:13:19 +0000

No, there’s no credible evidence supporting the idea of Chinese exploration of the Pacific or beyond the Cape of Africa. The reason we are objecting strenuously is that there is no evidence: “part of the process” as you put it, is for scholars to look closely at the evidence offered in favor of new ideas, and to challenge those ideas if they are insufficiently or fraudulently supported. Most of us who post and comment here regularly are quite aware of the centuries in which Chinese technology and society were more sophisticated than the West. But it’s about what they did, not what the could do; it’s about the actual history, not about some imagined or wounded pride.

By: Andy Fitts

Andy Fitts — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 07:02:32 +0000

There seems to be credible evidence building concerning wide ranging Chinese exploration by sea in the 1400′s. I find it amusing to read some of the so called ‘scholars’ of the establishment refuting these conclusions. The vehemence of some of their responses is a heightened indicator that some kind of truth has arisen that they can’t control. When I see this kind of thing in any field of knowledge, it instantly alerts me to ask why some people feel such a strong need to oppose the new information coming out. It is usually because such people have an agenda. It counteracts something that they stand for, and is seen as a threat. If they were free thinking people interested in the truth, they would be better at suspending judgement and joining in the discussion. Time and impartial inquiry always brings out the truth. Why can’t we trust in the process?

Alas, it is human nature, or at least the lower realms of human nature that makes some of us hold onto our territory and fight till the finish, despite information that we may be wrong.

Reading deeper, I sense that some folks feel that they’ve been given the role (or grabbed it themselves) to defend the honor of the status quo. To allow the game change of the Chinese having had a leg up on us, is unthinkable. What does that say about us? As barbaric westerners sailed the seas and overcame the natives by deceit, disease, and arms, what does that say about us, compared to the picture emerging of the Chinese entering cultures as traders, sophisticated communicators, sharing knowledge that help all parties in the end. Granted, the tribute system used by the Chinese has its own type of manipulation, yet it is vastly different than how Europeans barged into new lands and created chaos and then domination.

As westerners, we are increasingly exposing ourselves as spoiled brats, clawing at the last vestiges of our ignorance that we think protects us. Thank goodness that era is coming to an end. Our system is showing its flaws. Our only way out, without self-destructing, is to open up to the information and learn to share the inquiry.

Coming to realize that the Chinese of yesteryear (maybe not in modern times) had a superior culture than ours at the time of the Ming Dynasty is not that difficult to grasp. Why not consider it likely that they embarked on world voyages, with all the technology and social sophistication that they had? Give it a go. What have we got to lose? Our ignorance?

By: pierreb

pierreb — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:11:51 +0000

I can’t get enough of the online responses on this and other sites about Chiasson’s book. It won’t seem to go away, which tells me that it is worthy of serious investigation.

Has anyone done carbon dating on these ruins to determine their age? If they started there, that would at least prove or disprove the above claims about recent work from 1952 and 1968 etc. From there, a proper dig could be undertaken to examine the site in detail by an interested university group.

A casual outing by a few museum workers from Halifax does not measure up to Chiasson’s work. Their response seems lazy and biased, typical of bureaucrats who should not be deciding on such matters.

We all know how these kinds of discoveries in science and history are first met with resistance or ridicule. The response from authorities throughout history is always the same. I suppose it’s just Human nature for the comfortable to resist the unknown.

Why do people who claim to hold expertise and technical skill in these areas refuse to use those skills to build on the very knowledge they claim to protect? Get to work and prove him wrong instead of dismissing him off the cuff with arrogant and elitist notions about scientific processes.

Human history is by nature an incomplete project and until they study it in some detail – using their own ‘scientific’ methods to complete Chiasson
‘s inquiry, the cynics appear far more foolish than the man they mock.

By: David Trent

David Trent — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:33:40 +0000

Hi there,
I have visited Nova Scotia last week (Holiday) and met with a history teacher who has told me about the Cape Breton site and gave me the book (The Island of Seven Cities) written by Paul Chiasson.
For many years now I have an interest in archeology and Paentologie and have visited many sites in Europe and in Australia, where I live.
I am not a history expert, but like many of you I like to know …… and like to have some evidence to prove the story.
I am planing a visit to Nova Scotia in July 2009 to collect some buried remains of an old WW2 camps for a local historian society.
While I be visiting Nova Scotia I would like to do some location study of the Cape Breton area.
If there is any one living locally who would like to join or past on more information, please contact me on roo1961@hotmail.com