Ancient Visitors to the Americas

I would like to preface this post by making an apology to Marduk for the ad hominem attack. I'm new to the forum and hadn't read the TOS.

I haven't read Hancock, but I will have to disagree with his "devolved savages" thesis, Plato describes the Atlanteans as a bunch of arrogant military imperialists, so it would be hard for the Native Americans to NOT be an improvement on that.

Well, this ain't no case of a "contact buzz" on our dear 'ole mum, homeslice.
(Oh, yes, I made that horrible pun on purpose)

"So, anxious to ensure that her tests on the mummies were beyond reproach, she used this very technique - it's called the hair shaft test. Drugs and other substances consumed by humans get into the hair protein, where they stay for months, or after death - forever. Hair samples can be washed in alcohol and the washing solution itself then tested. If the testing solution is clear, but the hair tests positive, then the drug must be inside the hair shaft, which means the person consumed it during their lifetime. It's considered proof against contamination before or after death."

www.druglibrary.org...

uberarcanist did you read all of page 7 ?

Read it, if it was your intention to write a rebuttal, I don't think you did a very good job.

Look, we've got independent confirmation, proof (even by your own admission)
"If a drug is inside the hair it has come into the hair during the lifetime." of premortem drug use, scads of corpses all over the freakin' world with the same kind of forensics,

"She tested tissue from 134 naturally preserved bodies from an excavated cemetery in the Sudan, once part of the Egyptian empire. Although from a later period, the bodies were still many centuries before Columbus discovered the Americas. About a third of them tested positive for nicotine and coc aine.

Balabanova was mystified by the presence of coc aine in Africa but thought she might have a way of explaining the nicotine. As well as Egypt and the Sudan, she tested bodies from China, Germany and Austria, spanning a period from 3700BC to 1100AD. A percentage of bodies from all these other regions also contained nicotine.

[Graph showing presence of nicotine: Percentage of bodies with positive result - Egypt:89% Sudan:90% China:62.5% Germany:34% Austria 100%]"

what more do you want!?!?

I don;t believe you read all of this link and then got that post done in less than 9 minutes
www.hallofmaat.com...
it was on page 7
you will find a local source for your coc aine
and for your nicotine


[edit on 26-3-2007 by Marduk]

Left unanswered in the article is whether or not consumption of the Old World species can result in the concentrations found in the mummies. It seemed to me like the article implied or stated explicitly (sorry for not quoting here, pressed for time!) that the potency of the Old World species is considerably lower than the traditional New World ones.

I did find this quote fascinating:

"The Norwegian anthropologist Thor Heyerdahl crossed the Atlantic in an Egyptian reed boat. Possibly ancient people navigated South American rivers to the Atlantic, crossed the ocean and reached the African continent. Recently a pre-Colombian, earthen Roman head was found in Central America. Recent investigations of a mummy found in Florida, aged 7,000 years, demonstrated identical genotype with those of Asiatic race, but not with those of native Americans (S. Pääbo "Ancient DNA" Scientific American, November 1993: 64). These facts are possibly also evidence for trans-Atlantic relations."

You will probably want to respond to my previous post by stating that it might have been possible for Ancient Egyptians to concentrate the coc aine present in Old World species, and this may or may not be true. I do think the lower the levels of coc aine the harder the concentration process would be and the same would probably be true for nicotine.

how do you account for the total lack of any documentation on new world species being present in the old world
if pharoah had attained a reliable source of coc aine he would have been sure to write about it
in many cases with the evidence you presented the date is contemprary with other civilisations who also have no accounts describing a strange plant that gave you the munchies being imported from a land where people were small and in the habit of cutting the hearts from their enemies

there are also civilisations like Sumer who were far more maritime capable than the egyptians who didn't sail too well at all and they would be in your scenario the only likely importers of this substance
they kept extensive records of imports and exports
guess whats not in them

you are claiming that trade was continuous with coc aine and nicotine being bought over for 4800 years
thats almost five millenia
and theres no record of it anywhere
thats some secret huh

so pretty much unless you are theorizing that the coke was being flown in by Air America then you are claiming that what is most likely (i.e. local source) is not realistic and what isn't possible (i.e. new world source) is most likely
you see a fault in anyones logic there ?


[edit on 26-3-2007 by Marduk]

I have read the whole list, with most of the links.

I see one group steadfastly clinging to an idea that we came from the swamp. That is the bottom line in all of this debate.

We, as a civilization have collectively been trecking this whole globe since the first seeds of humanity have been around. A well trained group of rowers could easily cross any ocean on this world.

Don't let the facts that there are no recorded documents supporting this idea make your claims valid ones. If anything has taken place, it is that we have lost more technology than we have hung on to or had to re-learn.
With the exception of the last 200 years, and that is possibly questionable.

Smallpeeps had a lot of good info and the ideas that were brought up makes me think there is more to this than our present knowledge accepts.

It is common knowledge that accepted knowledge has no faith in alternate thinking. The problem is that the thinking used as the foundation for truth is based on alternate thinking that has become accepted as being facts, no matter whether it is right or wrong.

Free energy for example, does not exist, because basic physics says you can't produce more energy than what you put in. Output has to be a product of input. There are examples of patents for free energy machines that will not be considered, because according to the laws of physics it is not possible. Why do they work?

Some of you say that you can't wait to be shown where your thinking is wrong. That day will come soon enough for you and you will need to eat a healthy serving of crow.

The North American Native people have been around about as long as there have been people in China. I hosted several groups from China and one of the highlites in the tour was to interact with Native People. The Chinese seemed to think of them as lost brothers, because they could see kinship in the Natives from here. It was fun to hear the Chinese People's reactions to this interaction.

To flat out deny that people have been trecking all over the globe before Columbus is an error in judgement, not a statement of fact. It seems that most of what is accepted historical posture, is no more than speculation at its best.

The farther back in time we look for records of that past, the more clouded our vision becomes. It is all there though, and there is a group that are dedicated to preserving it, for a bit longer. The records didn't all get burned or hidden in Rome.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Read it, if it was your intention to write a rebuttal, I don't think you did a very good job.

Look, we've got independent confirmation, proof (even by your own admission)

Actually, we don't. The person you cite, Balabanova, was one of the original researchers. There's been no access to the mummies by anyone else, and no one else has come up with this sort of result.
www.straightdope.com...

Independant confirmation would be if they shipped them off to the British Museum and had them retested under tightly controlled situations.

I went off to find out what Dr. Michelle Lescott (the "discoverer of tobacco in Ramses' body") wrote about the discovery, and found out that she wrote... nothing. No papers, no analysis.

There is no reference to this person in any scholarly journal. Nor is there any reference on the Paris Museum's website (I searched in French, by the way.) While she might exist, we have no confirmation of this statement or of the findings... and none of Balabanova's, either.

The tale of where the fragments of tobacco were found also varies.

So that's not a confirmation.

To flat out deny that people have been trecking all over the globe before Columbus is an error in judgement, not a statement of fact. It seems that most of what is accepted historical posture, is no more than speculation at its best.

no it is an accepted fact
to claim that we have been is utter speculation not supported by any credible evidence
the accepted historical posture as you call it is actually based on empirical evidence collected by every branch of science.
your evidence is non existed and what there is is made up by pseudohistorians to further the sales of their books
voicing your personal belief in this is fine
but don't then try to claim that its mainstream and allude to people who require facts to come up with theories as short sighted Win 52
i seem to remember you telling us all before that there had been a global flood because you found something you couldn't understand in a rock layer
this after admitting that you had no geological training of any kind
what training in genetic research have you had to make these claims now
obviously if you had even looked at the genetic evidence you would know that it is both irrefutable and at the same time totally damning to your claim that we have been trekking all over the earth and then just forgotten about it
DNA doesnt forget
and it never lies
and the migratory patterns of the human race for the entire length of the holocene are well known.
well well known if you aren't ignoring the evidence in favour of your personal belief like you are

That is my point.....accepted fact.....what a flip flop statement.

I bet you could walk on water with that statement.

There is no actual proof to support your claims either. There is more proof being seen by real people daily, that shatters current beliefs and postures taken by the educated masses.

It is a matter of months now, before the real truth will be known. I am just too excited about the future, and can't hold back the good news, that is all.

Keep smiling, your smile will only get bigger.

Children, please stop fighting.

OK, I'm too lazy to read everything everyone's wrote but it's probably just as well because there always needs to be a bottom thread summary, even if it's repetitive.

Lack of documentation proves nothing. I think it would be safe to say that we have only discovered one-tenth of one percent of Ancient Egypt's intellectual output.

The Sumerians were not the most capable seafarers of the Ancient World. That distinction clearly goes to the Phoenicians, who worked for the Egyptians on numerous occasions. It's not impossible that they brought psychoactive drugs to Egypt from across the Atlantic.

[edit on 26-3-2007 by uberarcanist]

[edit on 26-3-2007 by uberarcanist]

Also, mitochondrial DNA evidence is not the last word in human migration studies.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Atlantis existed. If it has indeed disappeared beneath the waves, there's no Atlantean skeletons, mummies, whatever to cross-check the genes against to prove that humans were ever there. Then again, there is the very real possibility that a hyperdiffusionist culture that doesn't exactly fit with Atlantis as described by Plato existed and did not sink. Once again, mDNA does not help us at all in this case because the location of Atlantis is unknown.





[edit on 26-3-2007 by uberarcanist]

Originally posted by uberarcanist


Lack of documentation proves nothing. I think it would be safe to say that we have only discovered one-tenth of one percent of Ancient Egypt's intellectual output.

That is one of the most factual things that I have heard in this whole discussion.

The evidence is coming out into the open and as we learn more about what has been kept under cover by our governments, these other revelations about our ancestors will become facts.

I can just see those huge plates of crow and some people will have a bigger pile than others.

OK sloppy formatting, good facts.

We do have independent confirmation

"ROSALIE DAVID - Keeper of Egyptology, Manchester Museum:
'What we shall do is to provide tissue samples and a hair sample from a number of mummies in the Manchester Museum collection. I shall be very surprised to find they had coc aine in them.'

NARRATOR:
It would be a while before the results came back from the lab. Rosalie David's motive was not only to independently check Balabanova's methods. She also wanted to run the same tests but on different mummies. For she had more than one idea about how Balabanova could have got a misleading result.

...

ROSALIE DAVID - Keeper of Egyptology, Manchester Museum:
'We've received results back from the tests on our mummy tissue samples and two of the samples and the one hair sample both have evidence of nicotine in them. I'm really very surprised at this.'"

As for the French scientist, I've found two scholarly publications that carry her name.

links.jstor.org...(198911)38%3A4%3C591%3ACOTEOM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-7
www.mnhn.fr/publication/adanson/a96n1a1.html

Here's some pretty overwhelming evidence that domestic cotton and the bottle gourd were introduced to America from Africa several thousand years ago:

www.kult-ur-institut.de...

actually its heavily agendised and wildly innacurate

If you're so confident it's wrong, how about you show us why?

well maybe because I'm not into pushing an invalid agenda with double posts like you did and then ignoring the reply I have already given you to this question
www.abovetopsecret.com...


[edit on 27-3-2007 by Marduk]

Originally posted by uberarcanist
OK sloppy formatting, good facts.

We do have independent confirmation

"ROSALIE DAVID - Keeper of Egyptology, Manchester Museum:
'What we shall do is to provide tissue samples and a hair sample from a number of mummies in the Manchester Museum collection. I shall be very surprised to find they had coc aine in them.'

Actually, that's not independent confirmation. Those mummies had been kicking around Europe for a hundred years and longer. When fresh mummies (i.e., recently discovered) were examined, no such chemical traces showed.
s in

As for the French scientist, I've found two scholarly publications that carry her name.

links.jstor.org...(198911)38%3A4%3C591%3ACOTEOM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-7
www.mnhn.fr/publication/adanson/a96n1a1.html

Noted... and I see she does know something about tobacco analysis. Good find!

However, it doesn't address the issue that when they test mummies that have NOT been in museums (or private collections) for decades, that there's no such evidence of tobacco and coc aine. You could find traces in their hair of hydrocarbons, I'm sure, and conclude they drove around in cars... but that wouldn't be correct.

Independent testing of freshly discovered mummies shows no correlation.