Criticisms of Science

Critically minded anthropologists soon attacked this view. They considered the Bible as “too old” to be of any scientific value in relation to past history. Influenced by the evolution theory, they considered that the culture of Central America was an independent development. They argued that the close physical and mental relationship among all kinds of men would make them react in a similar way under similar conditions. Columbus, they believed, was the first to come to America apart from primitive immigrants who crossed the Bering Strait from Siberia. Thus they evolved what came to be considered an “indisputable scientific fact.”

A few decades passed, and this “scientific fact” began to crumble. Other scientists produced evidence to show that the Atlantic was crossed long before the time of Columbus. There was that Viking settlement in Newfoundland, among other things. So yesterday’s “solid scientific fact” is exposed today as a texture of speculations without adequate foundation.

Scientific experts also claimed that the voyage across the ocean could not be made on a boat made of reeds or papyrus, such as was anciently used by the Egyptians. Egyptologists were of the opinion that those reed vessels were usable only on a river, and would not stand the stress and strain of ocean movement. It was also claimed that the papyrus would become soaked with seawater and start decaying in less than two weeks.

But Thor Heyerdahl was not impressed by all the scientific criticism. He believed that such modern theories could be proved wrong. Indeed, he had reason to distrust scientific “authorities.”

“Authorities” Can Be Wrong

Before he sailed from South America to Polynesia on the famous balsa raft, the Kon-Tiki, back in 1947, all “experts” were of the opinion that the ancient civilizations of America did not carry impulses to the islands of the Pacific by means of their balsa rafts and reed boats. In 1943, J. E. Weckler wrote that no American Indians had seagoing vessels that could make the voyage to Polynesia. The same view could be read in a textbook written by the Polynesia expert, Sir Peter Buck, two years later. And it seems that this author got the information from his colleague Dr. Kenneth P. Emory, curator of the Bishop Museum in Hawaii.

Back in 1942 Emory had abandoned the idea that the ancient Americans had any contact with Polynesia. Why? Because another colleague had informed him that the balsa raft soon becomes waterlogged. He, in turn, had drawn his information from a treatise written by a South America specialist wherein it was stated that balsa wood loses its buoyancy completely after a few weeks.

The specialist obtained his information from the recorded travels of an Englishman who, about a century ago, had seen a balsa raft off the South American coast. The captain of the ship bearing this traveler told him that within a few weeks the balsa wood ‘lost much of its buoyancy.’ It is not known where the captain got his information. His words were accepted, and, says Heyerdahl, while “numerous teachers transmitted what they knew without even stating their sources, the doctrine became an axiom.”

Nevertheless, Heyerdahl sailed 5,000 miles on a balsa raft, and the fiction dubbed “scientific fact” was exposed for what it was. There was good reason to believe the scientists were all astray as to the use of the papyrus craft too. Though denying that a boat of reeds would keep afloat for more than two weeks, it appeared that none of these “experts” on Egypt had ever seen a papyrus boat in reality.

The Expedition

The unique vessel was transported to the Moroccan seaport of Safi, westernmost port known to the ancient Egyptians. After a week in the harbor the “Ra” was towed out into the Canary Current, which would carry it westward. Here is Heyerdahl’s own account of what happened next:

“The papyrus bundles undulated like rubber cables over the waves. Thick oars were smashed like matches, but not one papyrus stem broke. . . . the papyrus stems were solid like bamboo fibers and tough like rope. Three weeks passed. Four weeks passed. Soon we had sailed a longer distance than from Egypt to Crete, to Greece, to Italy, yes, longer than any distance within the Mediterranean Sea. [And farther than the “authorities” believed they could!] The waves still came roaring against us. . . . but the papyrus remained equally strong and tough. After six weeks we had sailed as far as from Copenhagen to the North Pole.”