I just found this vid about ancient remains found in Maya territory.
Interesting stuff all on its own.
But notice the very neanderthal skull around the :30 mark, along with a couple long headed skulls(not aliens). www.msn.com...
This is interesting but there's no such thing as a 7,000 year old Mayan remain. The Mayans didn't even exist until about 4,000 years ago (Preclassic
period). There were people living in the area, but that's waaay back almost into the Lithic stage. Of course all this is predicated on your
acceptance of what mainstream archeologists have to say.
What the OP is referring to as Neanderthal is at about 0:31 in the video. That skull does look quite different - the eye sockets are larger and the
face is flatter and more ape-like. However, looking at the still pic at 0:43 I think the 0:31 image might be a trick of the camera angle.
Now then there is the elongated skull at 0:34 (along with regular human skulls). That's the really odd part (although looking again the other
"regular" skulls also show signs of deformation). Why people would suddenly decide to deform their skulls in this manner is quite interesting. They
were clearly mimicking someone for some reason - status, wealth, power. The source person (or people) is however lost to us.
Those elongated skulls might not be aliens, but it seems a very bizarre practice to me. It was also practiced by cultures with no contact or knowledge
apparently of other cultures doing the same. I have seen old photos of African tribes people with elongated skulls..
So why strap boards to an infants skull to malform it in the first place? What or who were they trying to emulate? I understand it was seen as a
hierarchical thing but what mother or father would allow this to be done to their infant the very first time it was done? What could they have been
thinking the first time it was practiced?
Is it possible there was another race and that some of these ancient skulls were genuine and belong to that other race? Perhaps they bred with homo
sapians as the Neanderthals are now said to have done?
Yes, the skull around :31
The shape of the eye sockets is a dead give away, as is the bridge of the nose, anatomically modern humans have a "notch" between the brow and the
nose, while neanderthals don't, the cheek bones on HSN are also more rounded than the angular cheek bones of a modern human.
There are ancient skulls from mexico have other neaderthaloid traits, such as sagiteel crests and occipital buns.
It might be of note to mention that some of the indigenous people of Meso America have the highest levels of Neanderthal DNA of any living
populations, in fact they inherited their predisposition for diabetes from HSN.
Not quite the same thing but NOT the movie of the same name but have you heard of the legend of the City of Z somewhere in Brazil, it was supposedly
a city built by Mediterranean settlers whom reached american over 2000 years ago.
The reason that some people in archeaology do not want this to be true even if it is, is because of something called the argument between
diffusionism and Isolationism.
Diffusionism or Migrationism (the spread of idea's by contact or by migration of people's) provides a mechanism where by cultures have had contact
even before recorded history and have inspired each other as well as introducing technology's and even plant's to one another's cultures.
Cocaine and tobacco in some mummy's in Egypt and a hybrid cotton species of created from both old world and new world cottons' which the South
american's were using before Columbus got there seem to categorically prove that migrationism is actually Correct.
Many legendary names in Archaeology have denied this and claimed that cultures arrive at the same invention's time and again out of pure coincidence
and that view is entrenched in many archaeological establishments' the world throughout.
For some it is a matter of national pride, for other's it is more about there university bursary's.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.