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.

 

Mayans, 300 B.C. ?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   
www.utexas.edu...

Researchers from my home town here in Austin wonder about glyphs that point out to the existence of the Mayan culture before 200 A.D. So what made it disappear suddenly?




posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 11:28 PM
link   
I believe the greatest and oldest conspiracy is making out The Bible to be a Middle Eastern book, of Middle Eastern stories told by Middle Eastern people.

It starts with the whole world, when one super-continant existed, mentions the dividing of the land, tells of man scattering all over the world and now DNA is making scientists scratch their heads in wonder of how 'unrelated' people are found to be geneticaly related...duh! They should read The Book, IMHO.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by suzy ryan
and now DNA is making scientists scratch their heads in wonder of how 'unrelated' people are found to be geneticaly related...duh!


What? There aren't any scientists that "scratch their heads" at this. In fact, we owe this very information to science and scientists. Prior to the invention of the scientific method, no one suspected this, save people that believed in Adam and Eve. (That was the minority, still is.)

Harte



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Now you don't really expect folk to believe that all scientists, from all fields, currently agree on who got where, when and how.

Has anyone answered how Natives of the southern tip of Sth. America happen to have the DNA of a cross between Australian Abouriginals and Africans? The one theory they refuse to concider is that they walked, back in the days of the super-continant, before the 'earth divided' in Peleg's time.

The above example is just one of many that would throw the time line and foundation of many sciences way out of whack, if the truth was more important to that mega-industry than disproving The Bible.

Doesn't the great number of similarities between 'creation stories' around the world, even make you ponder the possability that people separated from the original source, by the division of languages and land, would lead to them only remembering and relating to key parts; rather than just accepting that different people, in different times, conditions and places, just 'imagined' the same 'stuff'?

The scientific method would be great, IF 'they' didn't sit on so many results that don't support the, "The Bible's a Fairy Story" stand. Find a cool looking rock, and 'science' is instantly all over the worlds media declaring, "life on Mars", but find DNA that supports Genesis and alot more 'study' has to be done before it can be shared with easily confused, lay people i.e. they have to find a confusing spin to put on it, lest anyone be moved to concider the possability of One Creator God.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigpappadiaz
www.utexas.edu...

Researchers from my home town here in Austin wonder about glyphs that point out to the existence of the Mayan culture before 200 A.D. So what made it disappear suddenly?


Actually, there's two points in the story that you missed:

1) It's Mayan literacy that was believed to date from only 150 BC. The Mayan civilization existed before that.

2) The Mayans didn't disappear. They're still here. They were overrun by the Spanish Conquistadores and enslaved and converted to Catholicism.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by suzy ryan
Has anyone answered how Natives of the southern tip of Sth. America happen to have the DNA of a cross between Australian Abouriginals and Africans?

Source?

A scholarly paper or news item, if you please.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 04:35 AM
link   
Byrd, this isn't one of the links I had before the recent death of my p.c., but is the first one I found (why does google list all the 'same views' first instead of the full spectrum?) on the ancestry of the ancient Sth. Americans.

I first heard about the DNA connection in/on the electronic media a long time ago, when that one detail stuck in my head.

Whatever the current 'official' opinion on this is, my main point is that there are alot of accepted opinions of human movement that need to be reviewed if not overturned before anyone can claim 'facts'.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Suzy, yes there are lots of opinion of human movement that need to be changed, but you need some, however slight, facts to prove the acceped opinions are wrong. Seems to me you want to bend things the other way to prove your pro Bible belief system and to me that is just as bad if not worse.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by suzy ryan
Has anyone answered how Natives of the southern tip of Sth. America happen to have the DNA of a cross between Australian Abouriginals and Africans?

Source?

A scholarly paper or news item, if you please.

suzy ryan, I think you're talking about mitochondrial DNA that is passed from females to thier children

And you have it backwards, Australian Abouriginals have a mitochondrial DNA composed to that of many Asians and Native Americans.....but all that shows is thier common ties to Africa....not each other.

Anyways, a few years back Dr. Oppenheimer did some gene testing on people from different parts of the world (focus was on natives, not muts) and he proved that the start point of H.Sapians was in Eastern Africa....from there man (or women is this case) migrated and over the years the females passed on there mitochondrial DNA to thier children (guys can't pass it on).



The one theory they refuse to concider is that they walked, back in the days of the super-continant, before the 'earth divided' in Peleg's time.

suzy ryan, Pangea was WAAAAAYYYYYY back in the day. Modern Humans have only been around for 170,000+- years. But you're right about one thing...they did walk


During the ice age humans walked across southern asia and on to the islands above NZ and then to Australia....the water back then was a little less deep than today and they had hard solid ice to walk on unlike now where it's just water north of Australia.

Humans have been in North America for around 15-20k years and in Australia for about 70k. That means (according to suzy ryan's theory) that Native Americans came from Africa via Australia....which is a little hard to do, imo.

I don't see what this has to do with Mayans in 300BC


I'll dig up some links and sources later on.....

Later
Sporty


[edit on 17/3/2006 by SportyMB]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 03:48 PM
link   

bigpappadiaz
So what made it disappear suddenly?

Many of these ancient cultures seemed to have suffered from some sort of 'city failure'. The harrapan cities were all abandoned, the toltec cities were abandoned, and even the cities of the central US were abandoned. The greek and other meditereanean cities were sort of abandoned, but then repopulated not too long afterwards. Looks like somethign similar happened to the mayans.

Originally posted by suzy ryan
I believe the greatest and oldest conspiracy is making out The Bible to be a Middle Eastern book, of Middle Eastern stories told by Middle Eastern people.

Considering that its in a middle eastern language, used middle eastern place names and concepts, and describes lands in the middle east, and that that is congruent with archaeological remains in the middle east, this isnt' too much of a leap.


It starts with the whole world, when one super-continant existed,

There were no humans around at those times in earth history.


now DNA is making scientists scratch their heads in wonder of how 'unrelated' people are found to be geneticaly related...duh!

I don't know what you are talking about, scientists have long since known that people were inter-related.

They should read The Book, IMHO.

The bible implies that some people were special and seperate from other peoples, like the hebrews.

that all scientists, from all fields, currently agree on who got where, when and how.

Theres a heck of a lot more agreement amoung scientists on those things than there is amoung the 3 major religions that use the old testament books!

The one theory they refuse to concider is that they walked, back in the days of the super-continant, before the 'earth divided' in Peleg's time

Such an idea would be rejected because the evidence indicates that the earth was already in basically the same form as it is right now when people spread from africa to the americas, and that there definitly weren't any people around when there was a supercontinent.
Also, you seem to be alluding to there having been a supercontinent, and then a break up. However, thats not correct. There have been at least two times when there was a supercontinent, which broke up and spread. The bible seems to be incorrect on that then.

Doesn't the great number of similarities between 'creation stories' around the world, even make you ponder the possability that people separated from the original source,

Similarities? The hebrews say that a single god made adam from dust and blew life into him. The greeks talk about dragon's teeth being buried and giving rise to men. OTher peoples consider themselves to be the ancestors of "the fox" or "the coyote", etc etc. What similarities are you talking about? And, again, we tend to reject the idea that all these stories are from the same source, because the stories don't appear to be that old.

IF 'they' didn't sit on so many results

What, specifically, are you thinking of?

but find DNA that supports Genesis

The existence of DNA does not support genesis.

there are alot of accepted opinions of human movement that need to be reviewed if not overturned before anyone can claim 'facts'.

There is far far more from teh bible that needs to be subjected to scrutiny before anyone can go around saying that its somethign that should be looked upon as a source of prehistoric information.



posted on Mar, 19 2006 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigpappadiaz
www.utexas.edu...

Researchers from my home town here in Austin wonder about glyphs that point out to the existence of the Mayan culture before 200 A.D. So what made it disappear suddenly?


Back on topic.

As Byrd said, the Mayans didn't disappear, though basically their culture took a nasty (and rather sudden) downward turn back when the conquistadores popped by.

Their culture existed quite a long time before 200 AD, but be wary of trusting every date they (the Mayans, not the scholars) cut in stone, since they weren't above a little pious cheating to give a king a "better birthday" or the usual "illustrious ancestors". Some inscriptions are actually dated (by the carved hieroglyphs, not modern science) as if they were carved thousands of years ago, though that's another case of pious propaganda.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Here's a map of modern human migration.




Hope that helps......

Later
Sporty

[edit on 20/3/2006 by SportyMB]



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Sporty, I'm glad you said "a" map and not "the" map.

That's the thing about conspiracies, "they" use 'the majority', 'the accepted' and "the based on the 'current' understanding", to hoodwink those who don't feel they have the 'position' to argue otherwise.

Now if you just pointed the arrow from that red circle the other way, and 'chose' another point in the the breaking up of the super-continant, so many 'annomolies' would start to make sence.

The oldest people, in the oldest land came from so far away yet remained unique...?

No I'm not attempting to state fact, just asking people to question, then question that answer and question the next answer and so on, like a real scientist.

Who we really are and where and when we really come from, is a much bigger 'political bat' to wield than abortion, nukes, weather or any of the currently 'hot issues'.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by suzy ryan
The oldest people, in the oldest land came from so far away yet remained unique...?

What do you mean 'the oldest people'??? What makes the mayans older than any other group of people? Also, why should age and distance traveled mean that they shouldn't be 'unique'?


Who we really are and where and when we really come from, is a much bigger 'political bat' to wield

How about we all just look at the scientific evidence objectively and come to our own conclusions? Forget the politics.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Mayans are still here definitely. Many of their cities were abandoned not due to collapse of culture but by choice. This kept their culture from degenerating in cities and staying the earth way. IF a city got to big it was simply abandoned and the people went back to the natural way of living in jungles... part of their spiritual principles becuz they belief mankind destroyed previous worlds by living in cities do long etc...

Thier are fragments of Mayans all over Central America (see Kogi tribe) as well as many groups of other Native Americans still living in those jungles.

The Mayans indicate now the world is slowly going back to the Mayan way of learning, and eventually the world will humble itself and all go back the Mayan way.

as for this bible crap, who really cares, what does that have to do with the Mayans or Aboriginies. These two groups of indiginous peoples that are still bieng culturally assimilated by both industrilization and christian religion. Try to make a difference for them and their land, not use thier oral history to tie into further validate your own religion. They mayans left 7 sacred magnetic learning centers all over the world in antiquity, i'd like to see a christian admit that... (christians you culturally assimilated the entire world, havent you done enough harm?)

As for the whole South American, Australian connection, African connection is very interesting, which ties into some stuff ive been researching (tangenta whenna tribes of New Zealand appear to have been both African and Caucasian before the Polynesians got there) and if you actually research African oral history they know Africa is not thier original homeland, and they constantly wonder why non tribal scientists (caucasians) want to make Africa to be the cradle of mankind all the time.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by mosca
Many of their cities were abandoned ... by choice. ... part of their spiritual principles becuz they belief mankind destroyed previous worlds by living in cities do long etc...

as for this bible crap, who really cares

As for the whole South American, Australian connection, African connection is very interesting, which ties into some stuff ive been researching (tangenta whenna tribes of New Zealand appear to have been both African and Caucasian before the Polynesians got there) and if you actually research African oral history they know Africa is not thier original homeland, and they constantly wonder why non tribal scientists (caucasians) want to make Africa to be the cradle of mankind all the time.


I'm sorry you had to throw in that "bible crap" bitter judgement (not a good attitude for a true, open minded researcher), because I do have great respect for ignored oral histories, they are one of the reasons I was drawn to take a closer look at the Bible, decades before I became a Christian.

I thank you for the rest of your post, because it indicates that much of what we're taught is 'known' is still up for debate, and that debate can reasonably include the question, "Are we being deliberately lied to and if so why".

I find it interesting that The Bible is full of warnings against big cities, starting with Babel, through to end times, and it's also a strong enough belief of the Mayan for them to abandon what is still functional and took great effort to develope.

You are one of the too rare few who seems to 'care' about the 'truth' of man's origens and movements. I hope you won't ignor others' research that seems to support yours 'just' because they are Christian, and I hope they won't withhold information from you because of your disrespect for their culture.

One of the greatest lossess to those seeking the whole truth, is the great destruction of Sth. American's culture, language, icons etc. by the Catholic church and I just can't help but wonder what they really wanted to hide.

I had hoped ATS would be a place I could share and compare 'some things' that are too important to this subject to be 'debunked' before being fully explored but no, when neither 'side' is capable of polite concideration of 'agreed disputable' details...



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 10:28 PM
link   
A couple of points, here:


Originally posted by suzy ryanNow if you just pointed the arrow from that red circle the other way, and 'chose' another point in the the breaking up of the super-continant, so many 'annomolies' would start to make sence.

That's not a model of Pangaea. That's a model of the world as we know it today. It's just turned on its side.


The oldest people, in the oldest land came from so far away yet remained unique...?

If you meant the Mayans, look at the colors on the map again. The Mayans were from the second wave of immigrants into this country. The oldest wave live along the coast (that would be the Chumash of California) and some areas of Texas and the south (tribes such as the Jumanos and Caddos).

They didn't remain unique. Their culture, even as they moved, was a kaleidoscope of beliefs and practices that changed as time went on. You can see this in their ancient art and you can hear it in their stories.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by suzy ryan
Now you don't really expect folk to believe that all scientists, from all fields, currently agree on who got where, when and how.

Has anyone answered how Natives of the southern tip of Sth. America happen to have the DNA of a cross between Australian Abouriginals and Africans? The one theory they refuse to concider is that they walked, back in the days of the super-continant, before the 'earth divided' in Peleg's time.



Suzy Ryan.

I think you are referring to the Fuegians...
From Tiera Del Fuego, and Pategonia.

Evidence has been found, that relates to Aussie-Aboriginal, and Southeast Asian populations..Mostly in the Genes of the Fuegians, and in some VERY prehistoric Rock Art (we're talking 10's of thousands of years), that bares striking similarities to ancient Austrailian Rock Art..

here is one link that I could find..

www.andaman.org...

There are more, but I had to wade through lots of links to a book called "fossils finches and Fuegians"...



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join