Proof: Advanced Ancient Indian Civilization existed

reply to post by qbik2008


I am simply arguing a case as best as I can. I have already worked it all out for myself, but I like to share what I know with others, so they can work it out too.

I kind of already know that people on this forum don't want to know about these things, but debate them. This is why I left ATS for 4 years or so. I got tired of people embracing ignorance, as opposed to denying it. Nothing much has changed, except my attitude. Now, I don't really stress myself on whether someone accepts knowledge or not. I kind of understand everybody is on their own intellectual and spiritual development path, and just as I cannot expect a child to understand adult things, likewise I cannot expect an underdeveloped person to understand higher things.

I understand now these higher things from ancient civilisations, who may still exist somewhere, ET, parapsychology, metaphyics are not for everyone and I understand why the Sanskrit tradition was elite. I am not meaning to be patronizing to anyone, this is an honest opinion. If others take this to mean that I am saying I am more advanced in my development, then sobeit. Somebody is going to be more developed and somebody is going to be less developed. It's the rule of nature.

You should pay more attention to the Sanskrit tradition it's the closest we have to ET knowledge

[edit on 3-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

yes unfortunately..."Truth"...is misinterpreted...many many times..."Truth" is "Pathless"...

Sorry Indigo

The reason you are having no success in getting others to believe in what you so strongly believe in is because you have advanced the art of self-deception to a new high.

Saying over and over that, "you've proven something" doesn't mean you've proven it.

You say that a word that until the 19th century meant demon - for several thousand years, is suddenly transformed into the modern concept of germ. Your proof of that is based on your so stating it. That dear is amusing but completely worthless. You mistate what links say or you link to other sites that say they were inspired by Vedic literature and offer that as proof.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that all the other Sanskrit scholars were wrong for thousands of years and that by chance - as you state yourself, we cannot check these sources our selves?

You don't think its just slightly odd that the real scientific community doesn't recognize the brilliant of your discovery?

Here is what you need to do. Go get a few thousand qualified scientist to agree with, get a concensus, shock the world, change the direction of human civilization.

If not please enjoy your self absorption on this subject - but we see what you're doing. It doesn't work.

Get your evidence, get your backup and try again later.

reply to post by Hanslune


Hans...I would have to say that "Proof" is highly overrated...until one begins to "Conceptualize"...one does not progress..."Proof" is the greatest lie that we have all been programmed to "Believe In"...from birth...the power is "Within" and not "Without"...

Originally posted by Hanslune
Sorry Indigo

The reason you are having no success in getting others to believe in what you so strongly believe in is because you have advanced the art of self-deception to a new high.

I think you should only speak for yourself. A lot people have believed, some have not. Please don't speak for others.

Saying over and over that, "you've proven something" doesn't mean you've proven it.

I have also said recently that nothing can be proven. I have provided the evidence, tons of it, and you have failed to acknowledge this evidence. The most recent evidence was more or less conclusive the Sanskrit civilisation had post-21st century knowledge. Unless you are going to accuse modern linguistics such as heavyweights like Chomsky of lying, this conclusion you must accept.

I have shown that the Sanskrit tradition was clearly thousands of years ahead of modern civilisation. I have shown you all areas in which this is true medicine, logic, mathematics and linguistics and Philosophy. Now while I can understand having advanced knowledge does not translate to having advanced technology, technology does not operate in a vacuum, it goes alongside ones knowledge. I have studied history to know how knowledge traditions develop and alongside which material technology develops. It was not until the enlightenment or the age of reason that the prerequisite condition for the development of technology was establishd and therefore within centuries we have computes, space shuttles, nuclear energy etc. It is evident that the Sanskrit knowledge tradition had their age of enlightenment thousands of years before modern times, thus there is no reason to believe that it would not have been possible for them to have advanced technology.

I also would like to point out when we say modern history, we are mostly referring to Western history, which happens to have went through a dark age for 1000 years. Eastern history on the other hand did not go through a dark age, never eschewed science or technology, and science, philosophy and technology were developed to a high extent that it is still inspires modern times. This only suggests one thing: The West is behind. It arrogantly believes that it is discovered science, reasoning and technology, when it fact its discoveries were thousands of years behind. We also have clear evidence it also plagiarised Eastern knowledge.

Ask any learned professor of Eastern Philosophy and they will tell you modern logic, metaphysics, cognitive science, ethics have already been exhausted 2000-3000 years ago in India. This has been admitted by many of our our own philosophers, such as the likes of Scrhopenhaeur, which based his entire philosophy of idealism and psychology on Indian Philosophy. So what really seems to be afoot here is Western arrogance, of which you appear to be party to, which cannot possibly accept that a non-Western culture was ahead of it and its own forefathers the Greeks. This is the reason this knowledge has been suppressed, even despite some of the best philosophers in the West deriving their knowledge from the East. Part of the reason is nationalistic, and partly it is because of Judo-Christian control on history. Indian history is far older than Western history and this was discovered by the early Indologists. While some accepted the new discoverties, the Indologists of a Judo-Christian persuasion didn't because they believed in biblical history. So using their power of authority they arbitrarily shrank Indian history to coincide with Greek history. Actual recorded history of India which placed the Vedas in at least 4000BCE was brought down to 1000BCE, and the transision period between Vedic Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit was made only a few centuries. According to this narrative a tribal, polytheistic and anti-science culture within a few centuries became a scientific, monistic and and urban culture. All of the dates for India's greatest minds were forced into the 1000BCE bracket(Panini, Patanjali, Kapila, Charaka) It is now known in modern historical research that this is bunk. Indian history is indeed 10,000 years old, it has been continious without any breaks and the IVC phase is the same as the Vedic phase i.e., the scientific culture that was forced into 1000BCE is around 4000BCE. This means all figures for Indian sciences need to be revised by several millenia. This is happening now in modern research.

New narrative: The new narrative shows that India never was a primitive culture in known history. It was always a post-enlightenment culture and it had established urban civilisation pretty much immediately after the glacial period ended. This categorically means only one thing, its history goes back into pre-glacial times. The Sanskrit tradition is thus our most preserved memory of our forgotten history.

I will furnish this case with some physical evidence later. At this point what should be noted all evidence is converging on one thing. India did have an advanced knowledge tradition which was post-21st century more than 5000 years ago at least according to evidence.

You say that a word that until the 19th century meant demon - for several thousand years, is suddenly transformed into the modern concept of germ. Your proof of that is based on your so stating it. That dear is amusing but completely worthless. You mistate what links say or you link to other sites that say they were inspired by Vedic literature and offer that as proof.

The word "gay" in the 19th century meant happy today the word gay mostly means homosexual. What does that tell you? It tells you that meanings of words change over time. So Rakshas meant demon in the 19th century, in 1000BCE it meant germ. I have also produced the Sanskrit dictionary meaning of that time to show that. Moreover your point is moot because the word for microrganism/microbe in the Charka Samhita is not Rakshas but krimi. I will again cite from the text because I have it at hand:

Charaka Samhita, chapter Vimansthan 7/9: "Krimis are very minute and can be observed with a yantra(instrument/machine). They are round in shape, without feet. Some are so minute they are totally invisible and copper coloured"

Corrobration from a book giving explicit details on Krimis with the Sanskrit terms and various classifications:

books.google.co.uk... =j1fXSb_8J-OrjAfk4-mWDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPA481,M1

books.google.co.uk... &hl=en&ei=MlrXScv7AperjAfupO2VDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4

I have told you before many times microbiology in Sanskrit medicine is not a controversial issue. Moreover, Sanskrit medicine is not just advanced in the area of microbiology, but every other area too. Plastic surgery for example, and modern plastic surgery is based on it directly and this is freely admitted as well. I think it should click in your head by now that what we call modern is based on Sanskrit knowledge itself.

Don't you think it's a bit odd that all the other Sanskrit scholars were wrong for thousands of years and that by chance - as you state yourself, we cannot check these sources our selves?

You've been given enough evidence to show that all of this is accepted fact. Now if you are genuinely interested, and somehow I don't think so because you've taken as gospel what modern history tells us, you need to do your own investigations and do them properly as well. I have done mine and I am sharing my results with refereces.

And none of the above is controversial. It's accepted fact. If you enrolled onto a degree course in Ayurvedic medicine you will be taught all of this and some more. If you enrolled onto a course to study linguistics, more than likely you will cover Panini. If you enrolled onto a course to study Indian Philosophy you will study Indian logic and metaphysics. This is all accepted fact.

You don't think its just slightly odd that the real scientific community doesn't recognize the brilliant of your discovery?

No, I don't, because I don't know what a real scientific community is?
I have provided you references and citations to India's most authorative scientific community and peer-groups. Evidently you don't think this is a real scientific community and I can only interpret that as racism. I think what you're really asking me is, "Don't you think its just slightly odd that the Western scientific community does not recognise the brillance of your discovery" It's an appeal to authority fallacy out and out and it is racist.

Here is what you need to do. Go get a few thousand qualified scientist to agree with, get a concensus, shock the world, change the direction of human civilization.

An openly stated appeal to authority fallacy. I don't need to rely on authorities to work out things. I am can think critically and independently, and sorry that you cannot. Your argument above if transposed in the 16th century would amount to Copernicus trying to prove the Earth is not flat by finding 1000 people in authority who agree with him. It turns out more than 1 million people disagreed with him.

Get your evidence, get your backup and try again later.

Nah, the demand are not on me anymore. It's on you to investigate all this information or keep your silence. As far as I'm concerned you have been debunked and out very outmatched by my education and research.

[edit on 4-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply to post by Indigo_Child


I stumbled upon a very interesting YouTube video...please disregard the "outdated" video or graphics...I believe it relates quite closely to your thread but in another context of the Ancient Atlantean Civilization...just another reflection of how utterly crude our "Current" science is, as it never takes into account the power within us all...we are being denied this power through the programming of our Consciousness via Politics, Religions, False Educations and a Fiat Currency system...directly from birth...

www.youtube.com...

There are about 25 parts to it...enjoy...at your leisure...if you so wish...

Cheers...

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by qbik2008

 

You should pay more attention to the Sanskrit tradition it's the closest we have to ET knowledge

[edit on 3-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

As I am a newbie to the concept of "Sanskrit"...I will definitely take a look into it's origins and thought forms...I am wondering if "Sanskrit" is linked to the "Sufi" teachings in any way? I am just asking because the "Sufi" thought form also stuck out in my prior learning and I was thinking of looking in that direction as well...any suggestions would be greatly appreciated...

Cheers...

Indigo

I have also said recently that nothing can be proven.

Then why act like it has been?

Until you can provide the Sanskirt documents and/or support from the scientific community. You are just making stuff up

You might try putting, "alleged" or "maybe", or " I really hope so" in front of your comments



[edit on 4/4/09 by Hanslune]

As I am a newbie to the concept of "Sanskrit"...I will definitely take a look into it's origins and thought forms...I am wondering if "Sanskrit" is linked to the "Sufi" teachings in any way? I am just asking because the "Sufi" thought form also stuck out in my prior learning and I was thinking of looking in that direction as well...any suggestions would be greatly appreciated...

Cheers...

Yes, Sufism, Kabbalh, Christian Gnoticism, Paganism and Celtic Drudism, Egyptian Mysticism are all from the Sanskrit tradition. They are a part of our Aryan heritage that has been lost and then deliberately suppressed by the Sumerian linage or the Annukaki or Illojim as they are called. They are what we today know as the Illumanti/NWO or basically the ones running the show.

The reason I said the Sanskrit was the closest to ET knowledge was that the advanced pre-glacial civilisatin did not develop indigenously, but ET races, possibly the Pleadians helped us, and it is their linages that came the Aryans. The Aryans had a lot of respect for these ET races and there was a lot of exchange between them. Thus the Sanskrit tradition developed with a lot of input from the ET's; man and the gods. This is why it is so advanced. However, because humans relied on ET for their knowledge, I doubt that that humans ever had their own technological socities. It was more of a mixture of advanced knowledge and occasional technology owned by the elites.

To Hans:

No, I'm afraid you got this wrong. Until you cannot show the evidence I have provided especially on computer science and the fact that Naom Chomsky derived his theory of generative grammar and universal language programming from the Sanskrit tradition is a hoax, you should keep your silence. You have been provided a ton of evidence which categorically shows the knowledge of the Sanskrit tradition is post 21st century - go and research it or just don't post here. Period.

[edit on 4-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply to post by Indigo_Child


Oh please Indigo you make me laugh

No, I'm afraid you got this wrong. Until you cannot show the evidence I have provided especially on computer science

Hans: The evil Harte debunked that many posts ago, you are unable to comprehend however. Anyway you just ignore contra-evidence

and the fact that Naom Chomsky derived his theory of generative grammar and universal language programming from the Sanskrit tradition is a hoax, you should keep your silence.

Hans: Oh no trying to silence me huh. That might be true about Noam but in science when someone tries to silence their critics within anything but evidence it is usuallly evidence of fraud

You have been provided a ton of evidence which categorically shows the knowledge of the Sanskrit tradition is post 21st century - go and research it or just don't post here.

Hans: Complete nonsense Indigo. So again Indigo please explain why this evidence has NOT been acepted, not by western science or even within India itself escept by a tiny minority...oh by the way you never explained how the people were wrong about demons for thousands of years - only for you to figure out they were germs - are those germs depicted on Hindu temples?

Lets look at the archaeological record = well there isn't one - where IS this super civilization?

We have primitive man, neolithic hunter-gathers, the Indus civilization - but wait where was the super civilization?

It left NO traces? At all? NOTHING? Wow that is a miracle. What is even more amazing we can find material from people before this civilization, during this civilization and after the civilization but nothing from the civilization itself - wow....




[edit on 4/4/09 by Hanslune]

I am just going to keep posting the same evidence I've provided you to embarrass you in front of the readers of this topic who will clearly see you are not even looking at this evidence. You're about to lose a lot of credibility:

Wiki: Panini

The Ashtadhyayi (IAST: Aṣṭādhyāyī Devanagari: अष्टाध्यायी)) is the central part of Pāṇini's grammar, and by far the most complex. It is at once the most exhaustive as well as the shortest grammar of Classical Sanskrit. It takes material from the lexical lists (Dhatupatha, Ganapatha) as input and describes algorithms to be applied to them for the generation of well-formed words. It is highly systematised and technical. Inherent in its generative approach are the concepts of the phoneme, the morpheme and the root, only recognized by Western linguists some two millennia later. His rules have a reputation for perfection — that is, they are claimed to describe Sanskrit morphology fully, without any redundancy. A consequence of his grammar's focus on brevity is its highly unintuitive structure, reminiscent of contemporary "machine language" (as opposed to "human readable" programming languages). His sophisticated logical rules and technique have been widely influential in ancient and modern linguistics.

The influence of Pāṇini on the founding father of American structuralism, Leonard Bloomfield, is very clear, see e.g. his 1927 paper "On some rules of Panini" (Journal of the American Oriental Society Vol. 47 pp 61-70).
Noam Chomsky has always acknowledged his debt to Pāṇini for his modern notion of an explicit generative grammar.[9] In Optimality Theory, the hypothesis about the relation between specific and general constraints is known as "Panini's Theorem on Constraint Ranking". Pāṇinian grammars have also been devised for non-Sanskrit languages. His work was the forerunner to modern formal language theory (mathematical linguistics) and formal grammar, and a precursor to computing.[10]
Pāṇini's use of metarules, transformations, and recursion together make his grammar as rigorous as a modern Turing machine.[clarification needed] The Backus-Naur form (Panini-Backus form) or BNF grammars used to describe modern programming languages have significant similarities to Pāṇini grammar rules. Pāṇini's grammar can be considered to be the world's first formal system, well before the 19th century innovations of Gottlob Frege and the subsequent development of mathematical logic. To design his grammar, Pāṇini used the method of "auxiliary symbols," in which new affixes are designated to mark syntactic categories and the control of grammatical derivations. This technique was rediscovered by the logician Emil Post and is now a standard method in the design of computer programming languages.





Panini was born in Shalatula, a town near to Attock on the Indus river in present day Pakistan. The dates given for Panini are pure guesses. Experts give dates in the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th century BC and there is also no agreement among historians about the extent of the work which he undertook. What is in little doubt is that, given the period in which he worked, he is one of the most innovative people in the whole development of knowledge. We will say a little more below about how historians have gone about trying to pinpoint the date when Panini lived. Panini was a Sanskrit grammarian who gave a comprehensive and scientific theory of phonetics, phonology, and morphology. Sanskrit was the classical literary language of the Indian Hindus and Panini is considered the founder of the language and literature. It is interesting to note that the word "Sanskrit" means "complete" or "perfect" and it was thought of as the divine language, or language of the gods.

A treatise called Astadhyayi (or Astaka ) is Panini's major work. It consists of eight chapters, each subdivided into quarter chapters. In this work Panini distinguishes between the language of sacred texts and the usual language of communication. Panini gives formal production rules and definitions to describe Sanskrit grammar. Starting with about 1700 basic elements like nouns, verbs, vowels, consonants he put them into classes. The construction of sentences, compound nouns etc. is explained as ordered rules operating on underlying structures in a manner similar to modern theory. In many ways Panini's constructions are similar to the way that a mathematical function is defined today. Joseph writes in [2]: -

In particular he suggests that algebraic reasoning, the Indian way of representing numbers by words, and ultimately the development of modern number systems in India, are linked through the structure of language. Panini should be thought of as the forerunner of the modern formal language theory used to specify computer languages. The Backus Normal Form was discovered independently by John Backus in 1959, but Panini's notation is equivalent in its power to that of Backus and has many similar properties. It is remarkable to think that concepts which are fundamental to today's theoretical computer science should have their origin with an Indian genius around 2500 years ago.

evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com...



An academic article on Panini and Computer Science, and AI

Kak. S, Bhate. S. Pan. ini's Grammar and Computer Science. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, vol. 72,
1993, pp. 79-94

An incredibly revelatory extract from this article:



It has been argued
by Ingalls, Staal, Matilal, Briggs, Kak and others1 that many contemporary
developments in formal logic, linguistics, and computer science are a rediscovery
of the work of these ancient masters. But apart from the question of
a correct history of ideas it raises the following important question of significance
to Sanskritists as well as cognitive and computer scientists: Are there
other rules in ancient Indian logic and grammar that may be of use in making
further advance in cognitive and computer sciences? A little bit of history
shows why this is a valid question. Nineteenth century Western linguists
did not see the signicance of the context-sensitive rules of Pan. ini's grammar.
In fact their fundamental importance was seen only when Pan. inian
style structures were rst introduced by Western linguists such as Chomsky
1
about thirty years ago. According to the distinguished linguist Frits Staal:
We can now assert, with the power of hindsight, that Indian linguists in the fifth century B.C. knew and understood more than Western linguists in the
nineteenth century A.D. Can one not extend this conclusion and claim that
it is probable that Indian linguists are still ahead of their Western colleagues
and may continue to be so in the next century? Quite possible; all we can say
is that it is difficult to detect something that we have not already discovered
ourselves."2



[edit on 4-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

[edit on 4-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

reply to post by Indigo_Child


[\quote]
They are a part of our Aryan heritage that has been lost and then deliberately suppressed[\quote]

Now is the "Aryan Heritage" that you are referring to...somehow related to the Nordics I have been hearing whispers about lately...I am also interested in origins of the Nordics...as they seem to be in direct contact with the higher realms...so to speak...

Thanks for your patience and efforts...

Well Indigo

Did you even notice that I accepted your claim of Norm?

You are using later abilities of real Indian civilization to try and bloister a concept of a super civilization.

There was a real Indian civilization that provided much to world civilzation - they existed.

You unknown super ET/magical civilization didn't you don't seem to realize it.

So now explain the lack of archaeological evidence for the super civilization



[edit on 4/4/09 by Hanslune]

Originally posted by Hanslune
Well Indigo

Did you even notice that I accepted your claim of Norm?

No, because your acknowledgments are not clearly stated. Everything you say has a dismissive tone.

You are using later abilities of real Indian civilization to try and bloister a concept of a super civilization.

There was a real Indian civilization that provided much to world civilzation - they existed.

Right that is the Sanskrit tradition and now you admit that this tradition was post 21st century in its knowledge. If you look at conservative dating of 1000BCE-1BCE, this meas this civilisation is 2000-3000 years more advanced.

Is that not anomolus? Yes it is and that was my original point and you've finally had to concede. Now the microbiology stuff shouldn't surprise either.

So this is what we know so far: We have an incredibly advanced tradition which knows about Computer Science theory, mathematical linguistics, formal languages, hashing algorithms, scientific method. In Philosophy it treating subjects like Cognitive Psychology, advanced metaphysics and cosmology. Its analytical skills are uber-modern. It is industrially manufacturing steel and zinc.

Where has all this knowledge come from. Why does this traditions internal records have such a long history and records linages going back 10,000 years and a history giving records for millions of years.

Did you miss this:

Panini was born in Shalatula, a town near to Attock on the Indus river in present day Pakistan. The dates given for Panini are pure guesses. Experts give dates in the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th century BC and there is also no agreement among historians about the extent of the work which he undertook. What is in little doubt is that, given the period in which he worked, he is one of the most innovative people in the whole development of knowledge.

What that tell you? It's pure guess work. The history of the Sanskrit tradition is so mysterious and ancient that we have no idea when it started. The dates are all guesses. As I told you earlier the early Indologists of a Judo-Christian persuasation forced all of Sanskrit history into the 1000BCE bracket to fit bliblical history. The pure guessing was admitted by the original proposer himself Mueller before he died. Modern historians are now overturrning that, it now turns out most dates of Sanskrit personalities are off by millenias. The new evidence shows us the Sanskrit tradition and the IVC are the same. It goes back 10,000 years.
The composition of the Vedas is now dated by scientific dating at least 4000BCE. This means the entire history of the tradition needs to be shifted back.

Everything about the Sanskrit tradition is anomolos. There is advanced dentistry in 7000BCE, advanced urban development and sanitation in 3000 BCE. It is practically impossible that primitive humans migrated around the 10,000 years coming out of the ice age and then immediately started building planned cities. Therefore the Sanskrit tradition goes into pre-glacial times. They are a memory of a lost civilisation.

So stop asking me for archaelogical evidence for a lost civilisation. I said at the start I am not saying this evidence exists, all I am saying is that the post 21st century knowledge of the Sanskrit tradition does not fit into the time frame and therefore it belongs to prehistory.

Can you dismiss the facts that practically all cultures speak of a great flood? Those were the superfloods that destroyed the Aryan civilisation. We are directly from that lineage.

[edit on 4-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]

Originally posted by qbik2008
reply to post by Indigo_Child

 

[\quote]
They are a part of our Aryan heritage that has been lost and then deliberately suppressed[\quote]

Now is the "Aryan Heritage" that you are referring to...somehow related to the Nordics I have been hearing whispers about lately...I am also interested in origins of the Nordics...as they seem to be in direct contact with the higher realms...so to speak...

Thanks for your patience and efforts...

I have suspected a link between the Aryans and the Nordics. I have read some interesting information, but for lack of evidence I only consider them as possiblities. One is that there is a clear link between us and Pleadians, which is why a lot of ancient cultures knew about them. They were the good guys. The other is the Sirans and the Lyrians populated this planet before we had evolved into humans, and they tampered with our genes. The brown-skinned Asians are apparently the Lyrians and they are the oldest race on this planet. The fair skinned are probably the Aryans.
It's very messed up. I really cannot say with any degree of certainty what our history was like 10,000 years ago, but I am definite that there was an Aryan civilisation and it was very advanced and it was in constant intercourse with ET civilisations.

Yes it seems the Pleadians are quite prolific throughout many books, themes and channeled material...and throughout these, the common theme is that they are one of the 'Friendlys'...thanks for the insights...

Enjoy your travels...within and without...

No, because your acknowledgments are not clearly stated. Everything you say has a dismissive tone.

Hans: oh great wonder of the age, I accept that the real Indian civilization had wisdom – that good enough for ya? LOL, however that wisdom was appropriate for their level of development. Ideas were created that were later used in the theory of computer science, they didn't have computer science.

Right that is the Sanskrit tradition and now you admit that this tradition was post 21st century in its knowledge.

Hans: No it isn’t. So you are saying that all data of all descriptions were written down by the super civilization and since that time all Indians have been complete idiots – they haven’t come up with a single piece of creativity? LOL Sorry Indigo that is sheeer stupidity and an insult to the real Indian Civilization. Care to show us where this data was “post 21st century”?? Odd that the present day Indian and their ancestors never just read the books and re-created the civilization...LOL

If you look at conservative dating of 1000BCE-1BCE, this meas this civilisation is 2000-3000 years more advanced. Is that not anomolus?

Hans: No it means you don’t understand reality. Nope because you are trying to apply the real triumphs of the Indian civilizations with your fake one. It doesn’t work.

Yes it is and that was my original point and you've finally had to concede.

Hans: LOL you are beginning to sound a bit like a nut. I don't mean that as insult but as an observation of behavior that is nut like.

So this is what we know so far: We have an incredibly advanced tradition which knows about Computer Science theory, mathematical linguistics, formal languages, hashing algorithms, scientific method. In Philosophy it treating subjects like Cognitive Psychology, advanced metaphysics and cosmology. It's analytical skills are uber-modern.

Hans: You have no such information, you are making stuff up.

It is industrially manufacturing steel and zinc

Hans: Like your very funny error in saying the Iron pillar was made by what? What did you say that was? LOL

Where has all this knowledge come from.

Hans: From you it would seem. Because the present day Indian and past Indians were too stupid to read what you said is in the “Sanskirt”, for thousands of years they were invaded and conquered because they couldn’t read! Or did they read it as it was written without the stuff you’ve added in? Please explain why they never used this information?

Why does this traditions internal records have such a long history and records linages going back 10,000 years and a history giving records for millions of years.

Hans: Because they made it up, religions do that to explain things when they don't have the scientific method

What that tell you? It's pure guess work. The history of the Sanskrit tradition is so mysterious and ancient that we have no idea when it started.

Hans: Wow, seems they missed that one key piece of information

Modern historians are now overturrning that, it now turns out most dates of Sanskrit personalities are off by millenias.

Hans: Yet oddly modern science hasn’t accepted this – you just keep repeating yourself -and yet it hasn't happened.

The new evidence shows us the Sanskrit tradition and the IVC are the same.

Hans: It is thought that Indus civilization added to or created the Sankrit tradition - the real one not the one you've made up

It goes back 10,000 years.

Hans: Hard evidence for that? Oh wait you don't have any.

It is practically impossible that primitive humans migrated around the 10,000 years coming out of the ice age and then immediately started building cities. Therefore the Sanskrit tradition goes into pre-glacial times.

Hans: The Indus civilization isn't that old, Catalhuyuk and Gobeki Tepe are mankind seems to have had no difficulty building back in that period - are you saying that those two sites are Indian?

You need to read a basic book on logic, your associations are silly

They are a memory of a lost civilisation.

Hans: For which no evidence exists

So stop asking me for archaelogical evidence for a lost civilisation.

Hans: Why because it falsifies your nonsense? I will continue to ask for it because as of this date in time no such evidence exists

I said at the start I am not saying this evidence exists,

Hans: Gosh a truthful statement, I’m humbled. However Indigo your signature says you have absolute proof - so which of your statements is correct?

all I am saying is that the post 21st century knowledge of the Sanskrit tradition does not fit into the time frame and therefore it belongs to prehistory.

Hans: Great theory, a couple of stumbling blocks, one no ancient civilization to have done this and two it requires that Sanskrit be rewritten by you

Can you dismiss the facts that practically all cultures speak of a great flood?

Hans: Can you dismiss the geological evidence against such a great flood?
Cultures speak of floods, as floods are common, a great biblical flood didn’t occur

Those were the superfloods that destroyed the Aryan civilisation.

Hans: There is no evidence of that, nor of that civilization – where is the evidence – if it was completely destroyed how did the Vedic tradition continue?

This is one of the best threads ive read an ats ,well done to the reserchers. Some inoformation i didnt know and now i do cheaper than buying a book.
agian well done.
This i direct to all contribtors [ look at the big brain on brad]
ment as a compliment

Lets do an archaeological review:

We have evidence for the Indus civilizations, hundreds of site, hundreds of thousands of artifacts, firmly date

We have sites for neolithic hunter groups (see notes below) so we have evidence for movement out of Africa and a slow rise in civilization which led to the Indus civilization

Yet Indigo insists that a super civilization arose and was then completely wiped out - except for the transmission of super technology disguised as religious text. The super civilization was wiped out completely with no trace by glacial floods around 10,000 BC

1. Where is the evidence for these glacial floods in Northwest India?

2. How did the glacial floods somehow miss all the neolithic hunter-gathers sites yet got every single super civilization site? Man talk about being lucky on one side and very unlucky on the other.

3. Why no signs of trade from this super civilization with other known cultures? Did they stay just in that area?

4. Where are did these floods end up at? (where are the debris)?

5. For an example the mesopotamians were hit with massive floods at various times - hundreds of thousands of artifacts remain, there cities can be found - for the super civilization not a single item survived, nothing at all.

6. Why no sign of modifications of the terrain? No mines? No tunnels? No modifiation at all and of course no relics or artifacts, even indestructible items, like gold, gems, glass - all gone....swept off to where exactly Indigo?

7. When asked these questions, she feely admits no evidence exists but in the next breath insists that - as her signature says:

Absolute proof of Ancient Advanced civilization: Read


Notes on the evidence of hunter-gathers in the sub-continent

Hunter-Gatherer Adaptations in Madurai Region, Tamil Nadu, India: From C. 10,000 B.P. to C. A.D. 500

Signs of Life: Engraved Stone Artefacts from Neolithic South India. Cambridge Archaeological Journal (2006), 16:2:165-190 Cambridge University Press

A good over view of human civilization in India (sub-continent)
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

The earliest settlers' antiquity and evolutionary history of Indian populations: evidence from M2 mtDNA lineage
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... _PMC&linkpos=1&log$=citedinpmcarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed