bomgeography wrote:For your sake I will look more in to it according to them they had people on the trail of tears.
What? Are you trying to tell me that the Central Band of Cherokee had people on the trail of tears? And you will look into it for my sake? Good grief David, read the Bureau of Indian Affairs report. I provided the link to it for you already.
Now please answer my question. Why did you present me with that fake tribe? According to you, your interest in them is 1 on a scale of 1-10. So why did you do it?
You have continued to call them Cherokee when the fact is that they are not. You have ignored the facts that the CBC themselves provided to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, facts which proved they are not Indians. And now all you can say, instead of answering my question, is that you will look into it but they had people on the Trail of Tears. OMG David. Get a grip and just answer my question.
One more little tiny detail. You tried to tell me they had ancestors on the trail of tears. Do you even have a clue what you are talking about? The common claim of these fake Cherokee groups is that they somehow were able to evade and avoid the trail of tears. http://www.cherokeephoenix.org/Article/index/6113
According to them they have ancestors on the trail of tears that they can probably prove. Weather or not they can be recognized as their tribe seems to be extremely difficult. There seems to be a lot of groups that do not want them to have their own recognized tribe.
bomgeography wrote: According to them they have ancestors on the trail of tears that they can probably prove.
David they are fake. Hands down fake and phony. I have no idea why you are now trying to make the absurd claim that they had ancestors on the trail of tears. Their own website disputes your claim. http://www.cbcherokee.org/www.cbcheroke ... lcome.html
Now please explain why you tried to present that fake tribe to me in support of your research. In all of this back and forth between us, you continue to avoid answering a simple question.
bomgeography wrote:Weather or not they can be recognized as their tribe seems to be extremely difficult. There seems to be a lot of groups that do not want them to have their own recognized tribe.
They only have themselves to blame and no one else. They had the opportunity to provide all of their evidence to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Nobody stopped them from doing that. And the sad, cold hard truth is that their documentation of ancestry consistently led back to white settlers. In no case did they have any documentation of Indian ancestors. Read the BIA report.
Also consider this: Larry Echo Hawk was with the BIA before he became an LDS general authority. He was involved in the process of determining the status of the Central Band of Cherokee. The facts speak for themselves that they are fake. So it isn't just me who disagrees with your claim David. A current LDS general authority (and the only general authority who is an enrolled tribal member) could not find any evidence that they are Indians.
So when are you going to answer my original question?
Last edited by Guest on Tue Sep 20, 2016 5:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Tapir you can prove that they are not federally recognized but I would like to see you prove that they do not have Cherokee blood running through their veins.
bomgeography wrote:Tapir you can prove that they are not federally recognized but I would like to see you prove that they do not have Cherokee blood running through their veins.
"The evidence shows the petitioner’s members and claimed ancestors were consistently identified as non-Indians living in non-Indian communities."
"none of the group’s members have demonstrated descent from a historical Indian tribe or tribes that combined."
Still waiting for you to explain why you tried to pass a fake tribe off on me in support of your "research". It would sure be refreshing if you would simply admit that you made a mistake and learn from it.
According to them they have ancestors who walked on the trail of tears I have no reason not to believe them. As far as them gaining federal recognition as Cherokee tribe I don't care. You have a strange fixation on this. And as far as I'm concerned this discussion about the central Cherokee band is over with. Start your own topic about this.
Lemmie wrote:No problem. Bomgeo concedes the Cherokee are not Zoramites. subject closed.
No I'm just tired of talking about the central Cherokee band. It has nothing 0 to do with my research. The evidence still shows a Greek influence I still think Cherokee descended from zoram Thank you very much
Lemmie wrote:No problem. Bomgeo concedes the Cherokee are not Zoramites. subject closed.
No I'm just tired of talking about the central Cherokee band. It has nothing 0 to do with my research. The evidence still shows a Greek influence I still think Cherokee descended from zoram Thank you very much
around the merry go round.... think it all you want, but your Greek influence evidence was disproved and discredited upthread.
bomgeography wrote: I believe the earth is billions of years old and that Noah flood was local not world wide.
I will assume unless you correct me that you believe humans have been living all over the world for 10's of thousands years. What I am wondering is what is your scientific reasons for rejecting the dating methods of DNA?
I take it you have no scientific reasons to reject DNA dating. Not really surprised.