It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mystery people founded New-Zealand before Polynesians.

page: 2
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

Glad you enjoyed it. The second bid had me catching flies when it showed the Tamil bell and the Sanskrit writing on the boulder.




posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 10:01 PM
link   


Maori say they taught them how to weave,make nets and other things


That's not PC so of course it's covered up.



posted on Mar, 26 2017 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Yep,still sad our history is being hidden,but the truth will be out pretty soon. A group of people has been digging a purposefully close cave that has known pre Maori bones in it,and they are getting close to them now,when found they will be sent to 3 different places for genetic and carbon dating tests and the results exposed.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 01:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: chr0naut

Its odd that koru pa in taranaki is dated to 900ad but yet Maori said they made it?


It makes sense to fortify high places, for both the tangata whenua and Maori.

Many Pa's have evidence of very early occupation and constructions so it is likely that the same locations would be fortified, no matter the culture.

Maori legends have some basis in fact. And there are political and land claim reasons why modern Maori would prefer to identify as tangata whenua, rather than just another group of immigrants.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 01:44 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Have a good look into what tangata whenua originally translated into before the PC stuff took over.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 02:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: chr0naut

Have a good look into what tangata whenua originally translated into before the PC stuff took over.


... of the placenta, of the land?

edit on 27/3/2017 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

I wasn't doubting that there could have been people living here before the Maori. I don't see why that's not a possibility. What I was doubting was the specific description of those people in the OP's video.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
North America had something similar happen. Some remains known as "Kennewick Man" were found in a cave along the Pacific coast, in either Washington State or Oregon (I don't recall which). They were seriously ancient -- something like 9000 years old -- but were not Native American. They were initially thought to be European, but it was eventually determined that they were related to the Ainu people of Japan. The way the laws are structured in the US, the remains automatically became a "Native American burial site" because they predate white settlement in the region. After a court battle, Kennewick Man was given to the local Native American tribe, and was supposedly buried in a secret location.

Along the same lines, I've heard of non-Native American remains being found in Central & South America that were even older -- c. 10,000-12,000 years ago. The evidence exists, but it is very much still outside the mainstream. The idea that the Native Americans might have displaced an even-earlier population is extremely un-PC, and meets with fierce resistance whenever it surfaces.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Oh yeah I heard about the Kennewick-man incident , they said that he looked European/Polynesian.


The Paternal (yDNA) results were from Haplogroup Q-M3 which is defiantly native American.



Haplogroup Q-M3 is one of the Y-Chromosome haplogroups linked to the indigenous peoples of the Americas (over 90% of indigenous people in Meso & South America).


However.....the maternal (mtDNA) results from the Kennewick man were from Haplogroup X2a




Haplogroup X is found in approximately 7% of native Europeans, and 3% of all Native Americans from North America.

Sub-group X2 appears to have undergone extensive population expansion and dispersal around or soon after the Last Glacial Maximum, about 21,000 years ago. It is more strongly present in the Near East, the Caucasus, and Southern Europe and somewhat less strongly present in the rest of Europe. Particular concentrations appear in Georgia (8%), Orkney in Scotland (7%), and amongst the Israeli Druze community (27%).


As you can see maternally 'the Kenwick man' was more European/Semitic than Native American , but just because some Native-Americans in north America had the x-chromosome of haplogroup X2 they used it as a way to please the natives.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Groot
Um, didn't watch the video.

But I did look up Patupaiarehe.

Seems to be a fairy tail or myth?



In Māori mythology, Patupaiarehe are pale spirit beings that live in deep forests and on mountaintops in New Zealand, and are sometimes hostile to humans. Ethereal flute music and singing sometimes reveals their presence. Patupaiarehe, also referred to as Turehu, Ngati Hotu and Urukehu (red heads), were said to live in large guarded communities.[1] They tended to occur in certain localities, especially hilly or mountainous regions. In the North Island, these included Mt Pirongia in the Waikato, the Coromandel Range from Mt Moehau to Mt Te Aroha, the Rotorua hills, the Urewera Ranges, and the Waitākere Ranges near present-day Auckland. In the South Island, they inhabited the hills of Banks Peninsula, the Takitimu range, and the hills between Lake Brunner and the Arahura River.[2][3] Another little-known term for these fairy-like folk was pakehakeha, which has been suggested as a possible origin of the word Pākehā, used to refer to Europeans.[4]


en.wikipedia.org...


So, no hard evidence?





That sounds pretty Indo European, eh?

There were people before the maori. The area was populated 50k years ago. There was an out of africa event that passed through southeast asia and populated the region. Recent finds have shown that some were eaten by H. Floresensis as they passed through. Its possible that H. Floresensis survived until pretty recently, known as Ebu Gogo.

I've often wondered if H. Sapiens and H. Floresensis could interbreed.

RE: the video, ill have to wait till much later to watch.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
The idea that the Native Americans might have displaced an even-earlier population is extremely un-PC, and meets with fierce resistance whenever it surfaces.


You mean is extremely political? If they were not the first and they displaced an earlier people then they have to stop whining about being displaced by Europeans. And soon the Europeans will have to stop whining about being displaced by Middle Eastern peoples as their birth rate is so much higher than white's.

We have the same issues here in Australia, with Mungo Man. A burial thought to predate Australoids (aborigines).

However the evidence for there being a different race in America before the ones that were there in 1600 is much stronger. Not only have there been many burials found but also there is a remnant of them at the very tip of South America around Ushuaia. I read a book about an anthropologist's time in Ushuaia and there were photos of the locals, they looked a lot like Australian Aborigines to me. Looking on Google images there are only a handful of photos and they are the least Aborigine looking ones they could find.

The Exodus of Israelites from Egypt and the conquest of Israel as documented in the Bible has also been discounted by the government paid researchers and replaced with the theory that the Jews are indigenous to the area. Not because there is no evidence but because it is politically expedient. All evidence is quashed.

Make no mistake, this is a political hot potato.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   
This documentary talks a lot more about them.

www.youtube.com...



edit on 27/3/17 by Cinrad because: What is going on with embedding YouTube videos? There are now two = signs in the video number and the embedding doesn't work anymore.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join