Disputed Bones

* Re “Whose Bones Are They, Anyway?” Opinion, Oct. 31: I fail to see how Karen Wright passes herself off as a science journalist. She sweeps aside accepted scientific theories like evolution because “many regular folks find scientific stories of origins . . . interesting but ultimately meaningless.” Like the Native Americans who might not be so native after all? Is she suggesting that their statement, “From our oral histories, we know that our people have been part of this land since the beginning of time,” holds more weight than DNA testing?

And the fact that we know more about the peopling of the New World today is somehow invalidated by the fact that there were prior theories based on less evidence? I can appreciate the sanctity of human remains and burial. But not the combination of ignorance and faith she suggests to determine whose remains we’re talking about.

WALTER McKEE

La Crescenta