Hi I was watching this Dr Quinn Episode…
Here, I'll post a link.



Anyway this episode plot it's about a paleontologist igniting some sort of "bone fever" among the townsfolk when he announces that dinosaur bones are worth $500 for a full skeleton that has never been found before. And then it turns out that in a Indian(Cheyenne) burial ground lies a bunch of dinosaur bones. And coincidentally since it's a ancient burial ground they not only dig dinosaurs human skeletons as well in order to find or discover hominid fossils as well. And as you can imagine that starts a whole bunch of disputes and stuff.

So that left me asking.
Is it okay or not to dig fossils in that cemetery? (Of course assuming those are actual fossils with scientific value and not just regular granny bones). Or in any cemetery for that matters? Or should we leave them as a cultural patrimony? Its a native American burial ground after all. Is that considering exhumation? And if it is is a bad thing? Because if it was up to me I wouldn't have cared and kept digging(like I said after confirming there were actual hominid fossils) despite being in burial ground. I mean isn't that what's better for evolution and therefor the greater good? That's why I'm asking you what do you think. What would you have done? Because since I'm an atheist I see a bunch of bones and that's it. And let's not forget that were not talking about a regular christian cemetery this is a marginalized indian tribe burial ground, therefore it's more relevant it's cultural value don't you think? So is desecrating human or in this case ancestral human remains a good thing? Because theres even a part were Dr Quinn says that this is a point were the cost of science is to high. But, I don't see it that way. Now despite that the paleontologist in this episode is a total dick that won't change the fact that science requires sacrifices. So tell me what do you think.

If you don't mind I'll reply tomorrow. I'm going to sleep now, it's a little late here.

I don't think there's any intrinsic objection to digging up human bones, but there should certainly be considerations of the feelings of others related to the decedents.

Now, if they're arguing that their recently deceased Aunt Minnie's grave should block off digging up fossils that might illuminate hominid descent, well, dig ole Aunt Minnie up, and give her a dignified reburial, and get on with the excavating.

I think I wouldn't do it but I have no beef with anyone who has the permission of those who own the place as well as the descendants of those buried their.

I'm wondering at what point desecration becomes archaeology. Clearly not while there are living and possibly grieving relatives, but presumably there is some kind of overlap since in this scenario there's no issue with excavating the dinosaur bones. And archaeologists are digging up remains of ancient humans all the time; everything from so-called cavemen to King Richard III, and he was killed less than six hundred years ago.

Ever since Ed Gein, people been touchy about folks digging up cemeteries.

---

You don't want to know about the cemeteries in Stalingrad during the siege in WWII . . .


(shudder)

(September 21, 2014 at 3:02 am)Zidneya Wrote:

---

Hi I was watching this Dr Quinn Episode…
Here, I'll post a link.



Anyway this episode plot it's about a paleontologist igniting some sort of "bone fever" among the townsfolk when he announces that dinosaur bones are worth $500 for a full skeleton that has never been found before. And then it turns out that in a Indian(Cheyenne) burial ground lies a bunch of dinosaur bones. And coincidentally since it's a ancient burial ground they not only dig dinosaurs human skeletons as well in order to find or discover hominid fossils as well. And as you can imagine that starts a whole bunch of disputes and stuff.

So that left me asking.
Is it okay or not to dig fossils in that cemetery? (Of course assuming those are actual fossils with scientific value and not just regular granny bones). Or in any cemetery for that matters? Or should we leave them as a cultural patrimony? Its a native American burial ground after all. Is that considering exhumation? And if it is is a bad thing? Because if it was up to me I wouldn't have cared and kept digging(like I said after confirming there were actual hominid fossils) despite being in burial ground. I mean isn't that what's better for evolution and therefor the greater good? That's why I'm asking you what do you think. What would you have done? Because since I'm an atheist I see a bunch of bones and that's it. And let's not forget that were not talking about a regular christian cemetery this is a marginalized indian tribe burial ground, therefore it's more relevant it's cultural value don't you think? So is desecrating human or in this case ancestral human remains a good thing? Because theres even a part were Dr Quinn says that this is a point were the cost of science is to high. But, I don't see it that way. Now despite that the paleontologist in this episode is a total dick that won't change the fact that science requires sacrifices. So tell me what do you think.

If you don't mind I'll reply tomorrow. I'm going to sleep now, it's a little late here.

---

Of course it's not ok to mess with Native American burial grounds! Good god man, have you not watched the Poltergeist movie?


Seriously, though, I'm not sure. If the coffins and skeletons were still valued by the descendants of the buried people, I would say attempt to excavate them carefully, and maybe bury them somewhere else or do something respectfully with them.

If there were a goldmine (scientific or otherwise) beneath the graves of your family and ancestors, would you be ok with their remains being sifted through in the name of progress?

In my opinion, it's less of a cultural position and more so a personal one.

I am stunned that someone was watching Dr Quinn medicine woman.

(September 21, 2014 at 12:35 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: I am stunned that someone was watching Dr Quinn medicine woman.

If Sully were nude he could stand in front of a blank curtain and read the Bombay phone book listings and I would watch.

A pragmatic comment. If digging up bodies is to be done in the name of science, we have a problem: bodies of certain ages are extremely rare, and in the digging, we might unknowingly damage a valuable resource. Perhaps they should be left until more capable scientists, with better technology, really have a need for them-- for example, if they need to learn something about the evolution of human disease and resistances, using analytic tools we don't currently have.