It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Right, sometimes such conceptualizations bother me. It's like how sometimes people ask where the Maya disappeared to. They didn't, there are over 20 modern Mayan groups still alive and well in modern Guatemala. They did, however, abandon the ancient stone cities for the highlands for the most part.
originally posted by: punkinworks10
a reply to: FauxMulder
Clovis is not a "civilization" it is a culture, and clovis did not "disappear", as the environment around them changed they had to adapt their range and lifestyle. And as they moved away from their ancestral core range in the southern plains/south east and eastern seaboard, they met and mixed with different peoples and integrated into existing groups.
The anzick child is a product of the clovis meeting up with south americans who had migrated north bringing their thick bodied points with them. This meet up likely happened in montana/idaho area, where an ancient stone quarry shows that three distinct groups of people used the quarry at the same time.
In california clovis gave rise to the chumash and the yokuts and influenced the dieguito culture of so cal.
originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: punkinworks10
The Picts remind me of the Woads in the 2004 movie King Arthur, the Celtic rebels that held off the Romans from invading northern Britain and wore full body war paint. Is this simply a movie trope or is there some basis to that? Hollywood obviously isn't the best source of history.
originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Painterz
Hey Painterz do you have any links to those images with books etc ?
id love to take a look
originally posted by: Nickn3
originally posted by: stormcell
Clovis people have been thought to have disappeared due to a extreme solar flare event or even a distant supernova that caused intense bombarbment of the North American continent. It would have damaged the DNA of every mammal and even the North polar ice sheets. It was thought to have taken the Earth out of the ice age.
Do you mean climate change, global warming? Interesting.
I have a feeling that science has already done just that, and that it has stood and been recreated time and tine again. An entire field of study is dedicated to getting you to buy, believe, or trust someone or something that may otherwise be unbuyable, unbelievable, or untrustworthy. Perceived credibility plays a huge role in persuasion on both peraonal and mass scales. From Edward Bernays "the father of public relations" and Ivy Lee "the grandfather of Public Relations" to the Bernays inspired Joseph Goebbels to the Soviets and back to America again, I believe we've pretty much proven to the best of scientific abilitu that people will believe something completely and sometimes obviously false simply because a scientist said it.
originally posted by: Hecate666
a reply to: Murgatroid
Science is excellent, if done by the right people and the right way. Strangely enough your meme alone could be treated as a hypothesis and tested by science. I have the feeling though that it wouldn't stand up to much.
originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: FauxMulder
A gobal flood should certainly leave the ruins and wash
away the people. Damned if that isn't what we have all
over the world. Science that dismisses a historical
document because it is also a religious text isn't even
originally posted by: LABTECH767
The adoption by Rome under Constantine of Christianity first required that the entrenched faith's and traditions' be smashed along with there culture - pagan Rome and that there already be enough Christian's to ensure the transition was a successful one - in other words an empire already turning christian (in fact Constantine adoption was probably after the empire was already almost christian of it's own accord or when Christianity had become one of the strongest belief's within it) so this was counter to the will of any group of men in positions of power wanting to use Christianity as there tool though such did come along later once it was established so to be frank that is not why it happened, it happened because people believed of there own accord in Jesus, in what they heard from others about him and even saw miracles done in his name and later enough of those that did survived the fall of Rome for it to continue as a major world faith to this day and in the faith of those of us whom believe into eternity.
So I can't agree with you on those point's.
The point's I do agree is that there are those that will, have and do whom abuse the faith of people to whip them up into frenzies and use them for war as we see in the extremists of Islam and which did happen under the Norman class of overlords of western Europe whom freely used the name of Christ to justify there petty wars on there neighbors in order to sack there city's and steal there lands, that however was NOT the church, it was men, men not God.