Ancient Visitors to the Americas

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR

Like I said. Native americans can't grow facial hair. And supposedly they never met anybody else who had facial hair, so where did they get the idea?

Also these white "gods" must have been superior to them technologically to impress the aztec (accomplished architecs themselves) into believing they were gods. An advance phonecian, middle eastern culture making contact with the new world? WHo knows.


well, being native american myself, we are very intune with nature and the creatures the earth. in the ancient times, we used to take traits of animals and incorporate them into our rituals (bear skins, worlf pelts, skulls, ect). so, it may not be that illogical for us to add a beard when we see nature full of hair. The aztecs who worshiped these white gods, were worshippers and followers of the jaguar spirit, does a jaguar not have facial scruff under it's chin? Also, archetypes are built into man before he is even born. it is a common trait shared by humans of all cultures. white happens to be an archetype for wisdom and intellegence, this is my best guess why our gods would be white.




posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 07:12 PM
link   
hey captainamazing do you know if there is mentioned in any Native Indian legends about visitors from far countries??



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I've heard that the pheonicans had advanced technology concerning their ship building and sailing techniques. When the entered foreign ports they would keep their ships away from shore and wouldn't let outsiders board their ships with the intent of keeping their advances a secret. I don't know if this is true but there are a lot of things which could of happened back then. Only just now are we starting to scratch to surface. There are so many ancient civilizations with technologies that we can't understand yet....



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Well I can understand wearing animal skins or imitating fur. But a full grown trimmed beard with nothing else is something only humans can do other than maybe a few orangutangs I've seen at the zoo. And maybe some monkeys. Where did they get the idea for a long full manicured beard about 8 inches long hanging from their chin, and jaw just like a human. I argue that they saw someone with a beard once, that person was different enough that they assumed he was of some form of divinity.

I had a Hopi friend once. Chief White Bear. He was really, really in tune with nature. So agree with you there. Native Americans got most everyone else beat with that, other than some monks, and heavy meditationers. But it makes sense. Anybody who lives in the jungle has to pay attention to their invironment, just to survive. Also, if we just pay attention nature gives us plenty of cues as to what is going on around us.

Did you ever go visit the aztec ruins. They are awe inspiring. THey had some serious architects in their society. Teotejican (I have no idea how it's spelled) and tenochitlan were sick! Especially the pyrimid of the sun. Damn! it's big. And tireing to climb.



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Thor Heyerdale sailed a reed ship from Egypt to America in modern times, so who says it cannot be done?

Phoenicians are actually very similar to the Hyksos who are very similar to Israelites and so on. Where did Phoenicians come from and how did they differ from the tribes of Israel near Goshen? Study the record of archaeology before you answer.

An astute member mentioned Glenn Kimball, who has made Egyptian artifacts in America his speciality. Here's Glenn Kimball's website where you can read or listen to some very interesting ideas.



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 07:42 PM
link   
thanks smallpeeps,
I am familiar with Glenn Kimball and his work. It is pretty cool that they there are finding artifacts with Egyptian influence over here. It could completely change the way we think about ancient history and what we thought we knew.



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Most historians and scientists agree that the Phoenicians were the most able sea faring civilization.

My view on this topic is fairly simple. That the Americas have been visited many times before the so-called discovery.

Whether on purpose or by mistake, of course it had been visited. Now, the hard part to figure out, is dealing with the more bizarre stories of Giants, Ant-People, and the many animal-men-gods that were not only worshiped south american civilizations, but were supposed to have even dwelt among them.

But, as far as I am concerned, it doesn't even seem strange to think that people from other continents may have ended up here throughout history.



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 08:34 PM
link   
The North American mounds have bproduced very egyptian like decorated stuff,with many egyptian sybols like the ankh etc.i believe around Cairo on the Mississippi river.....but other mounds as well..
The south american ledgends of white red haired gods who came and taught them much,then left on huge rafts going west across the pacific...
Thor Hyerdal also proved that it was possible to cross the pacific on one of these huge rafts made from jungle hewn timbers...they called it the Kon Tiki expedition.....
The grand canyon story is of giants whose mummies were discovered in the caves along the grand canyon.These were rumoured to have been dynamited by archaeologists of the day as well as the Smithy institute...
How true i cannot say, but i have heard it said .....
They have recently dicovered skelletons of a short elven like people in asia .....tho i understand the claim ia that their brains were different from our skull pattern??
Why i have seen pics somewhere of african animals painted on cave walls in south america....
Is it so hard to imagine all kinds of voyages that went astray back then?
Also they may have had a dead reconning kind of navigation that would work for them,using crystals for a sextant.
Then there is the ancient map that shows the outline of the antarctic coast, which is acurate bit we have never seen the land.Just traced the coast through instruments and radar because its shrouded in ice and has been for aeons.
Ancient mariners may have followed the coasts and set forth to cross at the narrowest parts too....
Also atlantis could have made the crossing very practical.....



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Horrificus
Not sure exactly what you aiming to do, besides be annoying and insulting. Bt, at least you are doing a great job at those 2 things. Congrats!

www.langust.ru...
read the last paragraph Horrificus, you might learn something



Originally posted by Horrificus
I was talking about craft that were already at sea, trying to get somewhere, I don't know. Probably just lost,and bouncing from landmass to landmass, ending up in the Americas.

it took Columbus 4 months to cross the atlantic and he had a good idea where he was going
he was in a ship that was equipped for the voyage and which was capable of making it
he had provoisions for the crew and more importantly fresh water for the journey
without any of these things he would never have been heard of again
no ship bouncing from landmass to landmass would do that because there is no landmass in the middle of the atlantic
and really
you think a ships navigator is that stupid that if he was sailing a southerly course and there was a storm he wouldn't immediately put in for the safest port
that is unlikely to be one in excess of 3000 miles away on a continent that he didn't know existed
as it is
there is no solid evidence that anyone from the old world made it to the new with the exception of some vikings who made it to newfoundland a 1000 years before columbus
in their case they left behind the dwellings which they built and also wrote about what they found when they got back home
this is called evidence
until you actually present some then you are just speculating
and speculation isn't proof



Originally posted by Horrificus
Yes! Did I research things that interested me, to find if they were true? Yes again

so what did you find that was true ?
care to answer that one



Originally posted by Horrificus
The point is, the features of their statues are all african in appearance

here are some genuine olmec statues







don't look very african do they
the heads you are talking about do not all have what has been called negroid features. funnily enough wide noses and lips is also a feature of indigenous indians. who do not have any african blood at all



One of the most common types of boulder sculptures is a series of human heads carved in a lifelike, naturalistic style. Although the specific identity of the subjects is not clear, evidence suggests that the heads portray either former Olmec rulers or defeated enemies. Facial features vary noticeably from one head to the next,

LINK
the Mayans are descendants of the Olmecs
ever seen a black Mayan ?



Originally posted by Horrificus

Some of the characters they used in their "writing" were african.

that is the view of Dr C A Winters, he's an afrocentrist
no other linguist on earth has backed his claims
in general they all say just the opposite



The Epi-Olmec script turned out to be structurally similar to the Maya. It is logophonetic, meaning that one set of the signs, the phonograms, have phonetic values, while the other glyphs, called logograms, represents morpheme. A morpheme is a word or part of a word that cannot be broken further into smaller units with relevant meaning.

and further



Some writers have also claimed that the Olmec were related to the Mandé peoples of West Africa even though there is absolutely no DNA evidence for this. Such writers have also claimed that Olmec symbols are a script that encodes a Mande language, even though there is no known Mande script until 1949.The script claimed to be related to Olmec is actually a set of North African petroglyphs which have not yet even been identified as writing at all, nor definitively connected to any African language let alone to the distant and as yet unknown Olmec language and writing. Mainstream scholars remain unconvinced by these speculations, most regarding them as crackpot.

ms.wikipedia.org...


Originally posted by Horrificus

Skeletons that have been unearthed have had similarities with Mende African skeletons.

no they haven't
www.angelfire.com...
that claim was made by a Dr Wiercinski
no other anatomist agrees with him



Among the racial groups that Wiercinski identified are a group of "blacks" of the Dongolian race and a group of "whites" of the Armemoid
race (Wiercinski 1970:247). Another study of the 78 Tlatilco skulls
was able to identify 2 types, one which they classified as typical and
the other as different (Vargas G. 1974). When he compared his groups
to Wiercinski's he said that Wiercinski's examples of the Dongolan
and the Armenoid (remember these are black and white) both belonged
to his normal group. Further he says that Wiercinski's finding of
12 races in the Tlatilco series and its implications for the racial
makeup of the population is hard to support (Vargas G. 1974:319). So
it looks like Wiercinski's findings were not supported by an independent
researcher who appears to have worked with the same data set as
Wiercinski.

since then with the advent of modern technology DNA samples of Olmec skeltons has revealed that none of them had any african dna at all

so basically
you've been reading books like Hancocks and thinking its all true when in fact you've just been lied to
the motive for these lies is pretty obvious
how many people would buy a book that contained tha amazing fact that a race of people from south america were actually native south americans




Originally posted by Horrificus

I am not going to say it is definite. For the sake of keeping my post honest. But, I will say that it is, again, silly to say that it is definite that they are not.

right so let me see if I can get this straight
you're not saying that it is definite
but you are saying that it is definite
and because you are saying that it isn't definite you think it would be silly to say that it isn't definite
errr
ok
still on the medication then are you ?




Originally posted by Cinlung
Yes, and where is your evidence? You are talking science fiction based on your own assumptions which you thought is the most valid way today, you have no facts at all. All you can do is linking some internet links after some google-ing job which 5 years old kid can do.

in that case I am constantly surprised by your total inability to post any links to back some of your silly claims, which by your own definition means you are less intelligent than a five year old
good call


Originally posted by Cinlung
IMHO you are just wasting people time, and certainly you are wasting ATS server space.

luckily nobody cares about your honest opinion
least of all me
and if they did
how is it that you currently have two warnings for spouting off about your pathetic opinion already and I have none for expressing mine

Originally posted by Cinlung
Ancient Egyptian: Do you live at that time? Do you have pictures, video or anything that proves ancient Egyptian were worst sailor? Who was 2nd worst? And who was best?

no which is why I actually have to rely on what they said about it and on the evidence that they left behind
this is whats called real evidence
what you usually use is whats called an erroneous fundementalist opinion
as such it is worthless




originally posted by Captain Amazing
there were people in present day egypt before america.

you're missing the point
they weren't ancient egyptians
they were homo sapiens archaic




smallpeeps
Thor Heyerdale sailed a reed ship from Egypt to America in modern times, so who says it cannot be done?

well Thor Heyerdhal for one
his ship sunk before it got there


smallpeeps
Phoenicians are actually very similar to the Hyksos who are very similar to Israelites and so on. Where did Phoenicians come from and how did they differ from the tribes of Israel near Goshen?

the Phoenecians came from Canaan
they differ from the tribes of israel because they had ships and because they weren't Hebrews. in fact when they were around Hebrewism didn't exist so asking about the tribes of Israel is a bit of a non starter unless you are using the bible as a history book
which it isn't



origianlly posted by Horifficus
My view on this topic is fairly simple. That the Americas have been visited many times before the so-called discovery.

then prove it
speculation is worthless without evidence
so far you haven't posted one link to any evidence
can't you find any from a credible site ?
why do you think that is ?


bergle
your post was a collection of well know pseudoscientific claims
with a few things you read in the news recently mixed in
I applaud your ability to put things together in a logical order but you really should investigate these claims individually before making a speech like that
`````````````````````````
shortened LINK

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk

smallpeeps
Thor Heyerdale sailed a reed ship from Egypt to America in modern times, so who says it cannot be done?

well Thor Heyerdhal for one
his ship sunk before it got there

Please be truthful. The second boat made it (RA II). Morocco to Central America. Also if you read Kon Tiki (obviously you haven't otherwise you'd know all this) you'd know that the trade currents will take craft on their own accord. Also there are now simple device towed behind craft which are small and which produce fresh water from seawater.

Also, Heyerdale found that provisions were almost unecessary because fish would literally jump into the boat at night due to the light on the boat.

But marduk, master of all, you totally rock, and you are knower of all and you know what can or cannot be done, so of course I am your eager student. If you say nobody can get to America before Columbus, I believe you totally on faith.




smallpeeps
Phoenicians are actually very similar to the Hyksos who are very similar to Israelites and so on. Where did Phoenicians come from and how did they differ from the tribes of Israel near Goshen?

the Phoenecians came from Canaan
they differ from the tribes of israel because they had ships and because they weren't Hebrews. in fact when they were around Hebrewism didn't exist so asking about the tribes of Israel is a bit of a non starter unless you are using the bible as a history book
which it isn't

The word Haiburu appear in the Amarna letters dating from more than thirty centuries ago, and that's pretty close to "Hebrew". Other refrences from this time also exist.



Habiru or Apiru was the name given by various Sumerian, Egyptian, Akkadian, Hittite, Mitanni, and Ugaritic sources (dated, roughly, from before 2000 BC to around 1200 BC) to a group of people living in the areas of Northeastern Mesopotamia and the Fertile Crescent from the borders of Egypt in Canaan to Iran.


We are talking about the "promised land", part of a larger "holy land" area of land approximatly the size of Southern California and you're clinging to the idea that these were not related groups? Hello? Phoenecian language and letters is the same as Hebrew in most ways.

Just because Hatshepsut was a drunk queen who thought she was a sailor, you conclude that Egyptians as a group were all inept at water travel? Seems like quite a stretch to me, but please, tell us more about your historical certainty. Do you believe all native american artifacts unearthed with egyptian themes to be fraudulent?


[edit on 9-2-2007 by smallpeeps]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk


Originally posted by Horrificus
Not sure exactly what you aiming to do, besides be annoying and insulting. Bt, at least you are doing a great job at those 2 things. Congrats!

www.langust.ru...
read the last paragraph Horrificus, you might learn something
Sorry. Unlike you, I didn’t have three hours to put together a presentation page today. Hehe.


Originally posted by Horrificus
I was talking about craft that were already at sea, trying to get somewhere, I don't know. Probably just lost,and bouncing from landmass to landmass, ending up in the Americas.


Originally posted by Marduk
it took Columbus 4 months to cross the atlantic and he had a good idea where he was going
he was in a ship that was equipped for the voyage and which was capable of making it
he had provoisions for the crew and more importantly fresh water for the journey
without any of these things he would never have been heard of again
no ship bouncing from landmass to landmass would do that because there is no landmass in the middle of the atlantic
and really
you think a ships navigator is that stupid that if he was sailing a southerly course and there was a storm he wouldn't immediately put in for the safest port
that is unlikely to be one in excess of 3000 miles away on a continent that he didn't know existed
as it is
there is no solid evidence that anyone from the old world made it to the new with the exception of some vikings who made it to newfoundland a 1000 years before columbus
in their case they left behind the dwellings which they built and also wrote about what they found when they got back home
this is called evidence
until you actually present some then you are just speculating
and speculation isn't proof


You keep using the arguments of supplies, distance, sailing abilities, and locations, as if they are disproving my point.
It is totally possible, and absolutely probable that sea going craft throughout the ages have ended up in the New World.
If you don’t agree, here are the results of a quick search for proof of long term survival at sea. I won’t waste more time on such a silly argument. (Maybe you can also argue that boats don’t get wet in the ocean!)


Shipwreck Survivors alive after 6 months at sea.
archives.cnn.com...



Epic shipwreck's survivors return
news.bbc.co.uk...



Man Rescued after 4 months at sea.
archives.cnn.com...



The "Whaleship Essex", four torturous months at sea. This is a true story. It is documented, horrible, and the story behind Moby Dick.
www.massmoments.org...



Originally posted by Horrificus
Yes! Did I research things that interested me, to find if they were true? Yes again


Originally posted by Mardukso what did you find that was true ?
care to answer that one

Dude, it is a whole book! What do you want to argue about? Specifically. I don’t know what facts you want to dispute. Off the top of my head, I agree that cultures all over the world have a “Great Flood” legend. And these cultures are not all near each other at all. I also say it is a fact that there are cultures in South America that have created statues that depicted “Negroid” features, and “Long-Nosed, Bearded Caucasian” features. I believe that a person they called Viracocha somehow found himself in South America, and did some wild stuff. Whether he did magic or just taught some things, I don’t know, but there is a lot of evidence pointing to the fact that this person existed. If there is something specific you want to argue, just lay it down, and I will either agree with you, or disagree.


[edit on 2/10/2007 by Horrificus]

Originally posted by Horrificus


The point is, the features of their statues are all african in appearance


Originally posted by Marduk
the Mayans are descendants of the Olmecs
ever seen a black Mayan ?


Again, you are asking me questions, and making statements that really have nothing to do with what I stated. I never said the Olmecs were African. I argued that Africans could have found themselves in South America. I never said that all the statues created by the Olmecs were Negroid. I was specifically talking about the stone heads I mentioned. I said there were “Heads” they created that were African in appearance.


Originally posted by Horrificus

Some of the characters they used in their "writing" were african.

Originally posted by Mardukhere
that is the view of Dr C A Winters, he's an afrocentrist
no other linguist on earth has backed his claims
in general they all say just the opposite

It took me all of 2 minutes to prove this wrong.
2 Linguists that agree with my observation.
Ivan Van Sertima
Anta Diop

I’m very tired, so I will continue tomorrow. Marduk, you are making this “less fun”. Hehe.


[edit on 2/10/2007 by Horrificus]
`````````````````
shortened LINK

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]

trimmed BIG quote

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 03:11 AM
link   

originally posted by mardukthis is called evidence
until you actually present some then you are just speculating
and speculation isn't proof


Is there something wrong with speculation about and questioning of historical theory's.
Troy springs to mind.

Arrogant put downs and wise cracks seem to be a common theme to your arguments, which say more about you than the posters who are willing to discuss and disect idea's which are different to yours.


Continue to question, research and learn without distraction.



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 04:28 AM
link   
athe first of your four examples of survival at sea was rescued by a fisherman
the second by a fishing trawler
the third by a navy frigate
and the whaling ship essex
don't make me laugh
out of 21 crew only five were picked up by other whaling ships
none of these examples crossed from one continent to another bouncing from landmass to landmass and none of them had they actaully made it in ancient times would have left any impact whatsoever on a populated continent



originally posted by horrificus
I never said the Olmecs were African. I argued that Africans could have found themselves in South America. I never said that all the statues created by the Olmecs were Negroid

you're standards of honesty seem to have slipped eh
this is exactly what you said

originally posted by horrificus
The point is, the features of their statues are all african in appearance. Some of the characters they used in their "writing" were african. Skeletons that have been unearthed have had similarities with Mende African skeletons.

all their statues are african eh
what a load of manure



originally posted by horrificus
Dude, it is a whole book! What do you want to argue about? Specifically. I don’t know what facts you want to dispute

Hancock wrote the book as an attempt to prove that Atalantis was in antartica. how did you miss that. did you read it or just skim through it marvelling at the brilliant research
like DOH


originally posted by horrificus
2 Linguists that agree with my observation.
Ivan Van Sertima
Anta Diop


so what you are saying basically is that two linguists who agree with the work of the well known afrocentrist author Dr C A Winters are
the sengelese afrocentrist historian (i.e. not a linguist) Cheikh Anta Diop and Ivan van Sertima another famous afrocentrist,
have a look at the wiki afrocentrist page
both these people are listed on it
en.wikipedia.org...

so what have you done so far to prove your original erroneous claims
lied about what you previously claimed to be true
submitted false evidence
sided with a group who knowingly make things up to further their cause
have you considered a career in politics ?



originally posted by mojo4sale

Is there something wrong with speculation about and questioning of historical theory's

this isn't skunk works
this is history if you can't discuss it without evidence then there isn't anything to discuss


originally posted by mojo4sale
Arrogant put downs and wise cracks seem to be a common theme to your arguments, which say more about you than the posters who are willing to discuss and disect idea's which are different to yours

its funny how when you don't agree with someone its an arrogant put down and when you do its a witty response
i can only presume that you are a hippocrite

love the way you think that troy was found by speculation by the way
shows that you know nothing whatsoever about it doesn't it


[edit on 10-2-2007 by Marduk]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 04:35 AM
link   
Your use of smileys is way too good for me.

According to many wise scholars Troy was nothing more than a myth, but some refused to accept this verdict and continued to question and speculate on its existance and location.


Calvert, a British archaeologist, was among the decided minority among scholars; he believed that Hisarlik was the site of Homeric Troy, but had had difficulty convincing the British Museum to support his excavations.

archaeology.about.com
So a majority of scholars believed that Troy was not located at Hisarlik, but Calvert thought that it did.


speculate—Synonyms 1. think, reflect, cogitate. 2. conjecture, guess, surmise, suppose, theorize.

dictionary.com



Forgive my ignorance i will no longer reply to your posts. Have a nice day.


edit to add links.

[edit on 10/2/07 by mojo4sale]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 06:31 AM
link   
from your link on speculate at dictionary.com



To engage in a course of reasoning often based on inconclusive evidence.



As the youngest child, Frank was overshadowed by his elder siblings and became involved with the careers of his elder, more flamboyant brothers. Frank remained unmarried, quiet and unassuming, he nevertheless had an enduring passion for the Homeric legends and a firm belief that the myths were history, not fiction.
As early as 1822, Hisarlik was identified by Charles Maclaren as a possible site also of Homeric Troy [1]. In 1847, Frank's brother Frederick bought a farm of over 2,000 acres (8 km²) at Akca Koy which included part of Mount Hisarlik
Away from performing his consular duties, Frank carried on careful, exploratory excavations on the family-owned land which incorporated the mound of Hisarlik

en.wikipedia.org...
so what you are saying
is that a man who's family owned the land on which troy was sited and who had excavated it was just speculating
errr
maybe he had excavated something eh
shall we find out



There Calvert uncovered the temple of Athena and parts of the city wall of Troy VI.

library.thinkquest.org...

so not only has he excavated at the site but he had uncovered parts of Troy
and you're still gonna tell me that he found it through speculation ?
like
he didn't use a shovel at all then ?



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
athe first of your four examples of survival at sea was rescued by a fisherman
the second by a fishing trawler
the third by a navy frigate
and the whaling ship essex
don't make me laugh
out of 21 crew only five were picked up by other whaling ships
none of these examples crossed from one continent to another bouncing from landmass to landmass and none of them had they actaully made it in ancient times would have left any impact whatsoever on a populated continent

Wow! There I was, thinking about how smart you were, yet you seem to miss the simplest of my points. And I’M a simpleton!
Anyway, my point was, that while your previous post involved bashing the potential for people to survive at sea for extended periods of time without proper supplies or direction, (you used Columbus as a control), there are many cases of people doing exactly what I said they could do. It is not unheard of at all for people to have ended up surviving months at sea, with limited or no supplies. My examples prove my point perfectly.
The survived. It doesn’t matter who picked them up, or how or when. The point is, they were living and surviving in that situation.
And your use of Columbus, as an example of what a well-supplied ship can do, if they have to, is food for my argument. There is nothing that hurts my argument that there are several ways, including “accidental”, that people could have made the trip to the New World sown through the ages. And that was all I have been saying.


Originally posted by Marduk

originally posted by horrificus
I never said the Olmecs were African. I argued that Africans could have found themselves in South America. I never said that all the statues created by the Olmecs were Negroid

you're standards of honesty seem to have slipped eh
this is exactly what you said

originally posted by horrificus
The point is, the features of their statues are all african in appearance. Some of the characters they used in their "writing" were african. Skeletons that have been unearthed have had similarities with Mende African skeletons.

all their statues are african eh
what a load of manure

Well, you seem to really enjoy this point. Like a lawyer in court, you seem determined to push the point home that I worded my post in such a way that I must have meant that ALL Olmec statues were negroid. I thought I addressed that in my last post. When I stated something to this effect, it was clearly in reference to the huge Olmec heads that DO resemble Africa features. So, there is no problem with my “honesty”. I explained myself.

Originally posted by Marduk

originally posted by horrificus
Dude, it is a whole book! What do you want to argue about? Specifically. I don’t know what facts you want to dispute

Hancock wrote the book as an attempt to prove that Atalantis was in antartica. how did you miss that. did you read it or just skim through it marvelling at the brilliant research
like DOH

Actually, I read it, initially, because it was given to me. I read it for enjoyment only. Regardless of what Mr. Hancock was trying to prove. Along the way, as with any book, there were points he made, that interested me. I looked into them, researched them, and found some of them to have a good basis for fact.
You may not understand this, because the anger and disappointment you seem to be showing over the lack of functional “fact”, (in your eyes), exposes you as somebody that may have actually ran out, purchased the book, and ran home to immediately begin reading it, searching for some clues to Atlantean Truth!
(note my use of your laughing head. May I also add that I fully believe you were wearing some manner of Star Trek uniform while reading this in your bedroom?)

And, now you are disappointed and bitter. Guess what… it’s a BOOK Dude! What were you looking for in it?
I’m sorry, and do not wish to offend anybody in this forum, but let’s be honest. MUCH of the literature involved in a lot of the subject matter we seem to find ourselves drawn to, is deserving of, and actually requires a “tongue-in-cheek” approach, when absorbing it. This type of material is definitely “Fringe Science”, and, although there is nothing wrong with that, I have found that, for the most part, the best one can do when reading it, is to look for facts within the theories and ideas that are splashed all over the walls!

To treat it like “Hard Science” is only inviting, at best, disappointment, and, at worst, madness.
But, you already seem to have discovered this. So, I am not sure what you are hoping to prove with your vendetta.


Originally posted by Marduk

originally posted by horrificus
2 Linguists that agree with my observation.
Ivan Van Sertima
Anta Diop


so what you are saying basically is that two linguists who agree with the work of the well known afrocentrist author Dr C A Winters are
the sengelese afrocentrist historian (i.e. not a linguist) Cheikh Anta Diop and Ivan van Sertima another famous afrocentrist,
have a look at the wiki afrocentrist page
both these people are listed on it
en.wikipedia.org...

so what have you done so far to prove your original erroneous claims
lied about what you previously claimed to be true
submitted false evidence
sided with a group who knowingly make things up to further their cause
have you considered a career in politics ?


Go easy with your insults. So far, I haven’t taken them to heart, because I feel sorry for your obssessiveness, and I can tell that you are getting something you “need” by trying to assert your authority or superiority, but, there is a limit.
You should not delude yourself to think that the ATS staff are sitting back, watching you, and letting you ramble on, out of awe, or a deep reverence for your intellect. That’s just more crazy thinking.
So, again, watch the insults.
I explained where I was going with my statement about the Olmec Statue Features. There is no deception involved.
And, even if these to Linguists are Afrocentrists, your point was something akin to Winters being THE only Linguist on Earth that agrees there is a connection between the Mende and the Olmec. I simply proved you wrong. There is nothing deeper involved. And, as I said, I did this in a matter of minutes. I have no doubt that, if I was as obsessed with this rant as you are, I could find more, and some of them would be individuals you could not slander.


originally posted by mojo4sale

Is there something wrong with speculation about and questioning of historical theory's

this isn't skunk works
this is history if you can't discuss it without evidence then there isn't anything to discuss


originally posted by mojo4sale
Arrogant put downs and wise cracks seem to be a common theme to your arguments, which say more about you than the posters who are willing to discuss and disect idea's which are different to yours

its funny how when you don't agree with someone its an arrogant put down and when you do its a witty response
i can only presume that you are a hippocrite

love the way you think that troy was found by speculation by the way
shows that you know nothing whatsoever about it doesn't it


[edit on 10-2-2007 by Marduk]

You just are not a nice person. Don’t you think you would enjoy this more, if people actually wanted to listen to your information, and wanted to hear how much you know?
You are clearly intelligent.

This is very rude, and there is no reason for it.
I think you were trying to spell “Hypocrite” when you insulted poor Mojo.

Now, be a good raving lunatic, and apologize Mr. Marduk.


[edit on 2/10/2007 by Horrificus]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   


It doesn’t matter who picked them up, or how or when. The point is, they were living and surviving in that situation.

you're missing the point completely arent you
are you being deliberately obtuse or is it just a talent you have
NONE OF THE EXAMPLES YOU GAVE WOULD HAVE SURVIVED UNLESS THEY WERE RESCUED
hehehe


When I stated something to this effect, it was clearly in reference to the huge Olmec heads that DO resemble Africa features

err
heres what you said again



The point is, the features of their statues are all african in appearance

see look
ALL AFRICAN (what you said)
and
OLMEC HEADS RESEMBLE AFRCIAN FEATURES (what you are claiming you said)




May I also add that I fully believe you were wearing some manner of Star Trek uniform while reading this in your bedroom?)

actually it was the candlestick in the conservatory




This type of material is definitely “Fringe Science”, and, although there is nothing wrong with that,

nope
its pseudoscience marketed as scientific fact
as such it is actually dishonest
the blurb in the back of the book claims



In a drastic reevaluation of mans past, using the high tech tools of modern archaeology, geology and astronomy,

it doesnt actually use any of these sciences
most of what it relies on are out of date theories and old newspaper reports
so
no not fringe science
not even close




it’s a BOOK Dude! What were you looking for in it?

earlier you said



A great book that discusses this kind of material is "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock. He sticks mostly to South America, but it s great nonetheless.

so it seems to have gone down in your estimation since its been proven to you that basically its crap
still going to reccomend it to people as a great book are ya ?




You should not delude yourself to think that the ATS staff are sitting back, watching you, and letting you ramble on, out of awe, or a deep reverence for your intellect. That’s just more crazy thinking.

may i draw your attention to the forum motto at this point
"deny ignorance"
theres only one person here who seems to think that the rubbish you've come out with so far is relevant to anything
you've been posting in ignnorance
i have been denying it
if you can't see that then its not just your information thats ingornat is it




You just are not a nice person. Don’t you think you would enjoy this more, if people actually wanted to listen to your information, and wanted to hear how much you know?

People do listen to my information
i get requests on a weekly basis from people asking me to explain something to them or asking for a good reference to something
I have had two pms so far about the content of this thread
neither of them were supporting your untenable position so trying now to claim I am not a nice person because you've been proven to be a bit dodgy is hardly mud thats going to stick is it
can you try harder ?
want to go for double jeopardy ?




This is very rude, and there is no reason for it.
I think you were trying to spell “Hypocrite” when you insulted poor Mojo.
Now, be a good raving lunatic,

actually it was a tip, a tep, a teep, a typo

calling me a raving lunatic is a personal attack and against the code of conduct
if you can't discuss these subjects without getting upset and screaming like a little girl then don't bother
next time you attempt to insult me so blatantly I will simply report you to the mod team ?




posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduknext time you attempt to insult me so blatantly I will simply report you to the mod team ?

Now now, let's all take a deep breath here.

...yheah, like that deep breath you take before you go off into the Atlantic ocean.

Okay, yes, marduk knower of all is right: It's tough. But the question I asked you is this: Do you believe all of the artifacts which Glenn Kimball talks about, and which depict egyptian themes and symbols, are forgeries?

The larger question is why you feel it is so impossible? Columbus' ships were like a dc-10 whereas even the spirit of st louis could fly very far. Corks tend to bob on the ocean and they tend to follow the currents. There is food at sea and water is attainable where there is sunlight (evaporation desalinization). Heyerdale was a real man, that's for sure. None of your pussyfoot schoolboy discussions. Here's a guy who built a friggin ship of giant logs and sailed across both oceans. And like I said, RA II made it from Africa to America.




posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk


It doesn’t matter who picked them up, or how or when. The point is, they were living and surviving in that situation.


you're missing the point completely arent you
are you being deliberately obtuse or is it just a talent you have
NONE OF THE EXAMPLES YOU GAVE WOULD HAVE SURVIVED UNLESS THEY WERE RESCUED
hehehe
You have absolutely no way of knowing that. And, it angers you that your opinion does not hold any water with me. Too bad.


When I stated something to this effect, it was clearly in reference to the huge Olmec heads that DO resemble Africa features

err
heres what you said again



The point is, the features of their statues are all african in appearance


see look
ALL AFRICAN (what you said)
and
OLMEC HEADS RESEMBLE AFRCIAN FEATURES (what you are claiming you said)

I already explained this, and there was no deception involved. You bringing this up over and over does nothing for your argument. It is just annoying.
Blah, blah, blah, you said “all”, “heads”, “African”, yada, yada, yada. Very good. I explained that I was talking about the heads that have been referenced as African in appearance, and everybody reading this knows it. This is the last time I respond to this non-issue.



May I also add that I fully believe you were wearing some manner of Star Trek uniform while reading this in your bedroom?)

actually it was the candlestick in the conservatory




This type of material is definitely “Fringe Science”, and, although there is nothing wrong with that,

nope
its pseudoscience marketed as scientific fact
as such it is actually dishonest
the blurb in the back of the book claims



In a drastic reevaluation of mans past, using the high tech tools of modern archaeology, geology and astronomy,

it doesnt actually use any of these sciences
most of what it relies on are out of date theories and old newspaper reports
so
no not fringe science
not even close




it’s a BOOK Dude! What were you looking for in it?

earlier you said



A great book that discusses this kind of material is "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock. He sticks mostly to South America, but it s great nonetheless.

It is enjoyable! There are also ideas in it that have some credence, and are worth pondering. I am still waiting for your list of incorrect information.

so it seems to have gone down in your estimation since its been proven to you that basically its crap
still going to reccomend it to people as a great book are ya ?

Unless you are prepared to say that EVERYTHING in the book is incorrect, I suggest the way you are wording your argument. I really am sorry this book has hurt you so.



You should not delude yourself to think that the ATS staff are sitting back, watching you, and letting you ramble on, out of awe, or a deep reverence for your intellect. That’s just more crazy thinking.


may i draw your attention to the forum motto at this point
"deny ignorance"
theres only one person here who seems to think that the rubbish you've come out with so far is relevant to anything
you've been posting in ignnorance
i have been denying it
if you can't see that then its not just your information thats ingornat is it

"deny ignorance" does not mean to insult, crush, demean and slander as you see fit. You been posting arrogance, opinion, intolerance of other peoples views, etc.




You just are not a nice person. Don’t you think you would enjoy this more, if people actually wanted to listen to your information, and wanted to hear how much you know?


People do listen to my information
i get requests on a weekly basis from people asking me to explain something to them or asking for a good reference to something
I have had two pms so far about the content of


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fixing quotes here is a 'full time job'

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]

[edit on 10/2/07 by masqua]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Thanks horrificus, but im a big boy, and i wont lower myself to respond anymore.


Hi canadianguy, managed to find some good sources here, the phoenicians seem a better bet than Egyptians imo.

Mark McMenamin is a professor of Geology at Mount Holyoke college. He has had articles published in Scientific American, Science and Nature, Journal of Palentology and Trends in Ecology and Evolution. link to profile


Working with computer-enhanced images of gold coins minted in the Punic/Phoenician city in North Africa of Carthage between 350 and 320 BC, (please see sketch of coin right and where the world map is supposed to have been inscribed) McMenamin has interpreted a series of designs appearing on these coins, the meaning of which has long puzzled scholars. McMenamin believes the designs represent a map of the ancient world, including the area surrounding the Mediterranean Sea and the land mass representing the Americas.

bold is my emphasis.

picture of coin and map here


Divers investigating the odd stone formation off Bimini Island found a shipwreck, that dated to the 1800's - while searching they found that it lay atop an older shipwreck, one that is positively Phoenician and dates to approximately 1000BC! Dr J Manson Valentine of Yale university confirmed the origins of the wreck. Evidence of other ancient shipwrecks exists, in particular a Punic vessel located off the coast of Honduras as well as one found "deeply buried in sand" in Mexico in the 19th century, another which is as yet unidentified off the coast of Texas as well as what was probably a Roman trading vessel off Beverly Massachusetts.


link

The Canary islands could have been used as a stepping stone for the Romans or Phoenicians to reach the Americas.


The islands were known to the Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans, and are mentioned in a number of classical sources. Pliny the Elder describes a Carthaginian expedition to the Canaries, and they may have been the Fortunate Isles of other classical writers. Although largely forgotten in the Western world until their rediscovery, they may have been visited occasionally by Arab and Mediterranean travelers in the Middle Ages.


other source


It is likely that the first people to discover the Canaries were early Phoenician explorers, originating from Sidon and Tyre in modern-day Lebanon. Herodotus claims that a Phoenician expedition circumnavigated Africa in the 6th century BC (see extract). Carthage, a north-African Phoenician colony, sent a colonising expedition of 30,000 people to the west of Africa in about 425 BC (see extract from Hanno). Phoenician coins are claimed to have been found as far afield as the Azores. Thor Heyerdahl sailed from Africa to South America via the Canary Islands in the Ra, a boat made of papyrus, in order to prove that the journey was possible for ancient mariners.



The Romans are known to have explored the Canary Islands. The most complete classical account of the Canaries is by Pliny the Elder (see extract), taken from a description of an expedition sent by Juba II, governor of the Roman protectorate of Mauretania (modern-day Morocco) from about 29 BC to 20 AD. The islands were found to be uninhabited at the time of this expedition, though Junonia (the Roman name for La Palma) did have a 'small temple built of a single stone', presumably evidence of earlier inhabitants or explorers.


Roman coins found on the north bank of the ohio river they have since been removed from display. Not sure if this is because of some doubt as to their authenticity.


McCormick has informed me that the exhibit has recently been removed from public display, because the Museum belongs to the state of Indiana, and the exhibit conflicted with the state's archaeological policy that there is no documented evidence of pre-Columbian contacts.


The Calixtlahuaca head found in the Toluca Valley west of Mexico City of Roman Origin.


In an interview in one of the leading Italian newspapers, prompted by the Hristov and Genovés paper, Prof. Bernard Andreae, the current director of the German Archaeological Institute in Rome, gave his opinion of the head: "It is Roman without any doubt... The stylistic examination tells us, more precisely, that it is a Roman work of the second century after Christ. It presents, in the cut of the hair and the shape of the beard, traits typical of the Severian emperors, exactly the 'fashion' of the period. On this there is no doubt."


from They Came Before Columbus, by Professor Ivan Van Sertima. He is professor of African studies at Rutgers University in New Jersey.


The first evidence of a black presence in the America was given to Columbus by the Indians themselves: they gave concrete proof to the Spanish that they were trading with black people. “The Indians of this Espanola said there had come to Espanola a black people who have the tops of their spears made of a metal which they called gua-nin, of which he [Columbus] had sent samples to the Sovereigns to have them assayed, when it was found that of 32 parts, 18 were of gold, 6 of silver and 8 of copper. The origin of the word guanin may be tracked down in the Mande languages of West Africa, through Mandigo, Kabunga, Toronka, Kankanka, Banbara, Mande and Vei. In Vei, we have the form of the word ka-ni which, transliterated into native phonetics, would give us gua-nin.” p.11. This was just one of the numerous instances, cited by Professor [van] Sertima, where the names, cultures and rituals of the Mandigos confluenced with those of the ancient Americans.


There is definately some interesting material out there, i'll be busy the rest of this week but will try to post some more info next week.





top topics
 
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join