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.

 

The truth about Native Americans

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Western archaeologists just discount that as impossible, because they can't see a written record of it.


No, they require proof. That's why it's called science.

Oh yes, of course, but I meant the attitude that the history of a certain people, as told by that people, cant' be true because they don't have physical proof is arrogant. The lack of proof does not vindicate the story, but it does not proove it false, either.



It's arrogant, here they have the cultures they are studying right in front of them, but act like these people are too stupid to keep their own past straight!


Then why should the Bible not be accepted as the truth? It's the word of the people, passed on down, right? The paradigm has been changing, but oral tradition is only so useful...be it in a First Nations context, or that stuff that you don't seem to recall quite the same as your pal did. That's why it comes down to science. That's not to say it should disrespect your traditions.

I beleive some of the Bible has been proven archaologically true. I think it is apples and oranges though. Most peopel who support the Bible say that it is the supernatural, non-physical elements that are most true, and archaological vindication is usually carried out to support that.

Saying "Such and such battle took place therefor the whole book must be true" is diffent than just saying "We lived here a darned long time."




posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by NativeAmerican
 

Try not to believe in everything you hear. There are those who would like for you to believe in this that or the other thing so that you would further their cause in some manner. You know, crawl under a rock and live in fear so that you can give them money to save you while they rape little boys and buy their way out of the mess with your money while preaching abstinence. How about starting wars all over the world or burning witches. You want the truth? Go and research tribal legends. When you've heard all of them. Put them all together. Then you will find the kernel of truth. That is where you will just begin understand our Native American heritage.
For well over 20 years, I've been telling people that there have been people in North American for more than 36000 years. They wouldn't believe me. 5 years ago a discovery was made, confirming my claims. My days of teaching the deaf is over. Now I will only point people in the right direction.
Good luck to you.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Western archaeologists just discount that as impossible, because they can't see a written record of it.

No, they require proof. That's why it's called science.



Oh yes, of course, but I meant the attitude that the history of a certain people, as told by that people, cant' be true because they don't have physical proof is arrogant. The lack of proof does not vindicate the story, but it does not proove it false, either.


I'm not going to say that nobody has ever said such a thing. Just because you are an archaeologist doesn't mean you can't be an arse, too.

What is legitimate, though, is that you can't call it a fact unless you have proof. The role of research is to toss around a hypothesis and see what evidence supports it. If you have a pretty good idea that it works, then you go looking for that evidence. It goes a step at a time, and if you miss steps, then you can't legitimately call it a fact. And that's a good thing, cuz you don't wanna bet the farm on conjecture.

When you do that, you get in line with the Von Danikens, Barry Fells, and the Graham Hancocks, and myriad others that sell books but add nothing to science. You can't built a history upon an 'intuitive leap', and expect it to stand.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NativeAmerican
 


I feel that not all Native Americans came from Messopotamia but some did. I'm sorry that this is not hard fact but most of my feelings are true. It feels like thats the right path to be on.


Sorry to all those who like hard fact.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


So what was the discovery 5 years ago that confirmed your claims?



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Periodically, the earth has experienced Epochs which wipe out technological progress and revert civilizations to a more fundamental state. Science really has no idea about where distinct people "originated". It may be that in the "Golden Age" civilization originated in the Americas and spread elsewhere, it could be the reverse, it could be simultaneous, it could be from outer space or inner space. It seems that Mesopotamia has some importance to you for some sense of common belonging? I personally see no importance to the origins of my leather bag or anyone elses leather bag. The spirit has come from the purely spiritual worlds which are its true home and there it will return. What matters isn't that the previous birth was a grub worm and this one is in a human form originating from some particular place. What matters is that your spiritual welfare is at stake if one is lingering in false hope for a world that will never be it's true home.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by NativeAmerican
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 

So what was the discovery 5 years ago that confirmed your claims?


I'm going to guess that the poster was referring to someplace like Cactus Hill, or Meadowcroft. See, the deal is that it only took one solid site to beat the intraglacial paradigm, and once that was done, everything else becomes possible. They did that by finding a site...Monte Verde, in Chile, that was positively dated to 15kya, with a reputable investigator, Tom Dillehay, and everything in a sealed context. They brought the naysayers in particular, showed them the evidence, and that opened the door for so much more...Monte Verde could date as early as 50kya.

Incidently, somebody asked what happened to the Clovis people. Clovis was a technology. Once that changes...the people could still be there, but using different tools, and can no longer be tracked using the old diagnostic ones.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReelView
Periodically, the earth has experienced Epochs which wipe out technological progress and revert civilizations to a more fundamental state. Science really has no idea about where distinct people "originated". It may be that in the "Golden Age" civilization originated in the Americas and spread elsewhere, it could be the reverse, it could be simultaneous, it could be from outer space or inner space. ... What matters isn't that the previous birth was a grub worm and this one is in a human form originating from some particular place. What matters is that your spiritual welfare is at stake if one is lingering in false hope for a world that will never be it's true home.


Or you could be could be a member of any other faith or practice. No one in particular has the inside track on the 'true meaning of life'.

As to facts...'Out of Africa' has a pretty good track record.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Some believe the wounded knee massacure was a direct result of beliefs that the "Messiah" would be born from a certain tribe...

In any case, the mass of us will never know truths outside history books written with prejudice.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
married a Native American, worked 3 years in an Indian Casino (trained in their history and culture) many fun interesting talks with many Native Americans....I can't add anything better than the poster "Yadda333" so put me down for "ditto" with what he has posted.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by NativeAmerican
 


i think its a far fetched idea.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Curious... Is there any evidence to support this? Are you sure it was the Americas Solomon sent them to?



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 03:40 AM
link   
Yes, interesting response. I also agree with those people who think there is not only a scientific connection but also a Biblical connection linking Native Americans to ancient cultures such as the Mesopotanians. Could the lineage of Jewish prophets be still within certain groups of Native American people? I believe the answer to that question is yes. If one has a good understanding of even small parts of the Old and New Testament it is easy to see that unmistakeable corrolations can be made. For example, Abraham (Father of all Hebrew & Muslim tribes) came from a region called Paha. Hence the Hopi name, Pahanna. Rachel, the wife of Jacob (grandson of Abraham) was of the Han tribe and she gave birth to two sons, Joseph and Benjamin (who when receiving the blessing of his father was likened to a wolf - wolf tribe?) A Sioux belief is that we are all related - I tend to agree with them.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   
our genetics being manipulated by so many alien cultures and in so many ways we cant even imagine. that is why there are so many different looking 2 leg races. it was like lcd tv or cars,first one race made us and we were so well done model so other alien races wanted similar slaves too but with their brandname tailored to their specific needs,that is it .
our creators were made too by their creators and so on , in a way it is an evoloution because they gotten idea how to make us from the life force (god), so esentially we were made by god with help of the alien races so dont feel so bad



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by k3456789
our genetics being manipulated by so many alien cultures and in so many ways we cant even imagine.


Great to know that. So tell me, where did you get your information from?



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Nativeamerican, that redice site has a lot of very interesting items.
RH negative continues to frustrate scientists. (They have changed it to factor X?)It keeps getting in the way of their “proofs in the matter of human origins and their migration patterns.
No, I don’t think we should be able to know our origins. I don’t think we will ever know, and I am OK with that, but I do lean to the idea that Earth was colonized/planted with flora and fauna by off-worlders..
Our modern technology is not “programmed” in that area.

It should become obvious to every thinking person that it is time to trash the idea that we somehow “evolved” from apes. If this “evolution” was advantageous then all apes would have done it. Nature only makes changes when it is advantageous to the survival of the species.

My next problem is with those “scientists” who base all their “theories” about migration on the Earth and its land masses as they exist now.

apache man, I haven’t had time to look at your links, but your comment “before the comet” got my attention. I think that is something that these arrogant scientists do not want to think about. This story is prevalent in cultures all across the globe. The Earth itself tells the tale too. The book “Cataclysm” By D.S. Allan & J.B. Delair is loaded with info on that comet and its undeniable affect on the Earth. .

There are some who cling to that “over the Bereing Strait” and to the South idea. It is a newer theory that the older civilizations are in South America, the Incas. It has been noted that the architecture of the structures going Northward becomes less sophisticated. And more primitive. North America has none of these massive stone structures.

I seem to have a peculiar problem identifying Native Americans on sight. I have personally known several people for years before I found out that, in this case, they were Seminole. And that character on Star Trek - Next Generation - Chicote (sp?) After years, I just learned that he was/is Native American.


forgot to add:
To those scientists who so arrogantly declare that humans have existed in this hemisphere for only 15K years, I would ask, "Explain these Peruvian skulls please.
You say that they are 70,000 years old!


[edit on 29-1-2009 by OhZone]



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by OhZone

It should become obvious to every thinking person that it is time to trash the idea that we somehow “evolved” from apes.


Then you'll be delighted to know that we were not evolved from apes...rather, that man and apes shared a common ancestor.



My next problem is with those “scientists” who base all their “theories” about migration on the Earth and its land masses as they exist now.


Well, that would be because it is pretty obvious what the time frame was for both continental shift and human evolution, and they are waaay out of synch for a relationship.


There are some who cling to that “over the Bereing Strait” and to the South idea. It is a newer theory that the older civilizations are in South America, the Incas. It has been noted that the architecture of the structures going Northward becomes less sophisticated. And more primitive. North America has none of these massive stone structures.


Once again, you'll be delighted to know that the glacial Bering land bridge paradigm is being replaced. Folks came down the sides of the existing continent as shorelines were different from today...so much water being tied up in ice. However, Incas are too modern to factor into the original peopling of the continent. Also, while North America didn't have the massive stone structures, it had some pretty substantial dirt ones that should not be dismissed.

Don't sell either native Indians or humans in general short. We're a pretty remarkable species, and it's ok to think we got this way without alien intercession. Jeez...if you really feel the need to share credit, then just praise God...



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 




Then you'll be delighted to know that we were not evolved from apes...rather, that man and apes shared a common ancestor.

Is that true that we weren't evolved from apes? Because that's what I was taught. And what's the deal with this "missing link"? As you can tell I am not the brightest person when it comes to anthropology.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by NativeAmerican

Is that true that we weren't evolved from apes? Because that's what I was taught. And what's the deal with this "missing link"? As you can tell I am not the brightest person when it comes to anthropology.


It's not a matter of brightness...only where your interests take you and we can only absorb so much on the side...

Here's a primer courtesy of the Smithsonian:anthropology.si.edu...



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Siren
The Bible says it took three years for Solomon's ships to make the trip back and forth from Solomon's mines. So it would seem the mines must have been a long ways away from Jerusalem.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join