The Truth About Christopher Columbus

page: 4
36
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 

First let me state that the portugese seem to be able to sail from africa back to europe with no problem. Then, If you read the book it states that half the fleet, after landing in greenland, presumably on the same atlantic current, the fleet then sails over THE TOP of EUROPE and Russia near the arctic sea all the way back to siberia, and then down through the bearing straight back past Korean peninsula to china. An epic journey no doubt but I must ask why, if the largest fleet in the history of humanity, which stopped EVERYWHERE else they went around the world, would just happen to decide to pass by europe, a place noted in good detail on all the maps that gavin claims to support his theory? The north atlantic current (same link above) took colombus to northern europe, not greenland, the north pole or russia. Zeng He supposedly had met a venetian cartographer and explorer on the voyage when the fleet was in calicut, yet they still float past europe. Europe was a known entity, and a known consumer of chinese products. To miss it entirely seems to be an amateur mistake. I have said this in the last post, evidence is the key, and anyone in academia should have the critical thinking skills to see this.
John
BTW, where did you have tenure and what did you teach?




posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnWorfin
 

John,
The charter given by the emperor was to find new trading partners. Your point actually answers your question. Since they already had contacts with Europe, it was not part of the agenda of the fleet. Remember also, that when the remaining ships returned, a huge shift in policy had taken place, while they were gone. Instead of being treated as heroes, the opposite occurred. Also, remember that was the start of China's self imposed isolation.



posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 

If you read the book more closely you will find that the fleet was not sent to find trading partners. The fleet was sent to spread the glory of china around the world, to amaze people with the wealth and power that was china (35000 troops in the fleet), to bring back rich and wonderous items from far off lands, AND HAVE THEIR RULERS RETURN TO CHINA AND PAY TRIBUTE TO THE EMPEROR. This is why you find paintings of giraffes in china and 15th century porcelain in kenya. All pieces of EVIDENCE of the voyages. It sems to me that europe would be the perfect place to find tribute. The military might of europe was seriously greater than the nations in africa. The european love for fine chinese silks and ceramics was fostered during the pax mongolia. With the fragmenting of the mongol empire, the europeans sought a sea passage to asia. If the chinese had working knowledge of europe, why would they sail right over the top of a place that held value.
Gavin uses some seriously flawed statements in his arguments for the supposed journey. He has enough truth in his book to make it seem very plausible. The pbs documentary on his book asked very critical questions that gavin was unable to answer. In the book, gavin claims, from a document of zeng he's voyage that he visited over 3000 kingdoms. This is a simple mistranslation of the chinese character for 10, which looks to the untrained, non chinese speaker to be very similar to the character for 1000. Other ming documents clearly state he visited 30 kingdoms, not 3000. these amatuer mistaked are readily obvious to "members of academia" with experience on the subject. This is why his hypothesis is discredited. He lacks real evidence, even so far as to ignore other records of that time. The records of the voyages were partially destroyed, but many other records of the time survive, even some relating to the zeng he voyages. In the book gavin names admirals that were supposedly responsible for rebuilding the fleet off bimini, yet there are other ming era records that name those same admirals as commanding navies in china at the same time. When pressed about this subject, he quickly recants the statement in his book and then asserts that it was actually a leutenant of said admiral. Again unlike the vikings who left hard evidence, there is no EVIDENCE as in hard, undisputable proof that the SUPPOSED voyage happened.
It is very easy to log onto an effectively annon web board and claim to be a professor, or a pilot, or a person with great knowledge of a subject, but the responses I have recieved from you prof, show a total lack of critical thinking on the subject. I find it hard to believe that someone would be a tenured professor at a university for almost a decade yet lack the abitity to think critically on a hypothesis that was published in a for profit book completely outside the realm of Academic history. Since you also refuse to name the prestigous instution that you were tenured at, or even the subject you taught, I suggest you do like me, login with a bullsnit name, like say jonpauljones and then go to your local JC and take some intro to logic classes, and some critical thinking classes, and stop claiming to be an academic. This website is chocked full of believers who claim to be "experts" yet have read only a small amount on the actual subjects, like gavins book, while ignoring the wealth of information available on the subject. As i have stated before, I really like gavins book, but his "answer for everything including the newport tower(a documented grain mill)" hypothisis just seems too good to be true. This, combined with a lack of hard evidence just makes it seem implausible. I will change my tune when the evidence presents itsself, but until then, It will be mental masturbation.

John

[edit on 6-2-2008 by JohnWorfin]



posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnWorfin
 


To whatever your real name is-
First of all, it is you who is off-base here. Whether you believe me or not, is your business. I came onto this site, so that I could express some ideas, and perhaps lend a perspective from someone who spent most of his time in business, and ended his active career by giving back to students my experiences in business. I NEVER claimed to be an expert in history- it is not my field. As to why I "refuse" to divulge my identify", if you had ever worked in academia, you wouldn't need to ask that. Giving out your name, location, and personal information is not a good way to insure the ability of enjoying retirement. Your insults show that you are a completely vulgar person, who needs to learn some manners. I am who I claim to be. Whether you believe me or not is YOUR problem not mine. I have nothing to gain here. I was hoping that this forum would be different from other forums that end up getting flooded with vulgar people. I guess in your case, I was wrong. In a way, though, you might fit in with academics. I despised some of them where I taught, because they had the same attitude as you. If nothing else worked, they could always fall back on academic "rigor". (For those not in academia, let me put it in the vernacular- total BS.) For the record, the reason I like Gavin is that he produced results. His books sold. As one who didn't teach business, you probably can't understand that, but he is a success. That is what business is about. He didn't do it by hurting anyone, or stealing. He did it by proposing an interesting theory that caught on. His customers got value, most, even you claimed, enjoyed his book. Whether all of his facts are established or not, he brought people like me, who knew little about history, into the debate. Remember that text books of 20 years ago, in many cases are looked at, with disdain, since many of them contain grevious errors. Who knows, maybe all of it will be found to be false, but whether you will admit it or not, he has advanced history, by bringing light to an interesting theory, that forced people to look more closely at the subject.
You may be using a phony name, but I won't. I am being honest about my desire to remain anonymous. Anonymity allows people to say what they really believe without worrying about reprisals.



posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 04:08 AM
link   
a very intresting post but in reply to ur theroy

the world as always bin there with people on it we only call it a discovery form are socities point of view, fact is its always been three with people on it.



posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 05:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 

First, I am not off base. I posted to a forum about the discussion of christopher colombus and early exploration of the americas. I recieved a response from a person CLAIMING to be a tenured professor and using that claim to suggest I support or believe a hypothesis that is at best, seriously flawed. There was discussion of examples of the flawed nature of gavins hypothesis. The responses I recieved showed a complete lack of critical thinking on the subject. Critical thinking is a necessary part of any rational discussion on any subject. Otherwise it is not a discussion, merely a series of statements with no merrit outside themselves
Second, if questioning who someone claims to be on an annon forum is vulgar, then I am. The point of the annon forum is that anyone can claim to be anything. That is why I have a stupid online name. I would rather the content of my posts speak instead of my handle. As per the first part of this post, the lack of critical thinking in the responses has led me to question the truth of your claim in academia. I was under the impression that critical thinking skills were a necessary part of holding the title of professor emeritus, or tenure for that matter. I suggested you change your handle because the use of your current handle seems misleading in light of the content of your posts. Would my posts carry more weight with you if my handle was "Majestic12founder", or "GavinMenzies". I hope not. Put it simply, you sound like a fan. A fan that has so much love for a theory that even when presented with proof of several flaws in said theory, the fans point of view is only re-enforced. This is also called not being open to new possibilities. I do however understand the desire to not use your real name on a forum that regularly entertains discussions on how the holocaust was not so bad or how butt probing aliens took my cat.
Third, Business and history have never been good bedfellows. Should we believe anything Dick Cheney says simply because he is a financial sucess? So what if you and alot of other people including me have bought and enjoyed the book. This says nothing about the book other than it was a good read(it was). Financial sucess has nothing to do with history. Henry ford wrote a book called "the International Jew" It was a justification of his racist attitudes based primarily on the protocols of the elder zion. It was BS based on BS, yet americans bought the book. Did those sales to Pre-ww2 racist americans mean the book was valid? No it did not. It took a critical eye to see past the crap and dispell the myths of the book as the racist BS it was. I was hoping to find more critical eyes on this forum. Like the folks who saw through project serpo. Evidence is still the key.
Fourth. You are right, I never taught business. I do however understand the difference between a theory published in a for profit novel and one published in a peer reviewed journal. As a person with a Phd in business, you should know it too.
JohnWorfin(kudos and props to those who actually get it)

[edit on 7-2-2008 by JohnWorfin]



posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Well we know that 2500 years ago somebody came to northernmichigan and removed about 50,000 tons of copper and it ended up in the Mid East. So there was lots of trade before old Chris showed up. Look up some of Michigans Copper Country history.

mikell



posted on Feb, 7 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikellmikell
Well we know that 2500 years ago somebody came to northernmichigan and removed about 50,000 tons of copper and it ended up in the Mid East. So there was lots of trade before old Chris showed up. Look up some of Michigans Copper Country history.

mikell

We know no such thing and in fact we "know" the opposite, inasmuch as anything can be "known."

Harte

[edit on 2/7/2008 by Harte]



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 10:47 PM
link   

The real Story into the name America.. It's Welsh!!!!



Richard Amerik was the chief customs official in late 15th century Bristol. Of Welsh birth or extraction, his name was possibly derived from “ap Meriug”, or “son of Meurig.”

The case for America being named after him goes like this: Duty collecting having apparently been a lucrative occupation, Amerik was the principal investor in John Cabot’s transatlantic expedition of 1497. Cabot allegedly repaid the favour by naming the newly discovered continent in Amerik’s honour.

Cabot had been urged to discover new lands by Henry Tudor. It’s thought he reached Newfoundland, landing at several points on the coast before returning to Bristol. No definitive record of the expedition survives, though it has been suggested that Amerik’s name may have appeared on Cabot’s maps because of his official status in Bristol, as well as his financial stake in the venture.

The following year the Florentine navigator Amerigo Vespucci landed in South America and explored the area around the mouth of the Amazon. He returned several years later, travelling down the coast to what is now Argentina.

The name ‘America’ first surfaces in 1509’s Cosmographiae Introductio by the Strasbourg cartographer Martin Waldseemüller. It is said that he believed Vespucci – and not Christopher Columbus- had discovered America and so named the continent for him.

This great debate is made all the more intriguing by the lack of certainty either way. Neither claim emerged until the 20th century and each was backed by historians with their own cultural axes to grind.

Amerik was proposed by Dr Basil Cottle – a Welshman who, like his hero, spent a lot of time in Bristol. Likewise Vespucci’s champion was another Italian, Alberto Magnaghi.

An expert on names, Dr Cottle asserted that if the Vespucci claim were true, then the continent would by convention have been called “Vespuccia.”

From a Welsh perspective, it’s nice to believe America should really be called ‘ap Meuriga’.


www.crystalinks.com...
www.britannia.com...



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 11:55 AM
link   
I think he may be referring to this

MISSING: 500,000 TONS OF COPPER From Science Frontiers Digest of Scientific Anomalies #90, NOV-DEC 1993 by William R. Corliss, citing Betty Sodders; "Who Mined American Copper 5,000 Years Ago?" Ancient American, 1:28, September/October 1993

Corliss

This link is horribly slow and at this time has come up yet

The other link is (Sodders, Betty; "Who Mined American Copper 5,000 Years Ago?" Ancient American, 1:28, September/October 1993.)



MISSING: 500,000 TONS OF COPPER


oooparts

The link is to a page that lists a number of items, the one about the copper is about a page down and has the above title.

The actual story by Betty Sodders I cannot find.

Oh the answer is the native Americans.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
And lets not forget the cocain and tobacco found in egyptian mummies (cocain only grows in the Americas) -

www.druglibrary.org...

www.faculty.ucr.edu...

www.straightdope.com... aine-mummies

www.newdawnmagazine.com.au...

Just one of the many pieces to this mysterious puzzle we call human history...



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   
Whoever he was, wherever he was born, whatever his motives were, the fact remains that it was HIS voyages that changed the course of European (and American) history. The impact on the economy alone was enormous.

Anyway, that was a very good and nice effort on your part. I am sure many will find it very useful.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Yep he stumbled into being a famous and even reviled person. Often times you can get more done by blundering ahead, being wrong and accidently finding something.

Its too bad that the Norse didn't publized their finds earlier but the communication pathways of the time were very primitive.



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 


I have for years been very interested in the Viking exploration of the North Atlantic. Evidence has been found in Greenland, such as animal fur and wood fragments, which suggest that the Greenland Norse made voyages to the New World for supplies such as wood and animal furs. These voyages apparently continued until the Norse colonies on Greenland died out in the mid-1400's.





top topics
 
36
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join