Interesting.

Are the ancient Indians white people?

Originally posted by Maristo316

I think the OP got it right.

Then it is apparent that you should muster up another thought or two on the subject.

Doesn't their (real) history speak of them travelling amongst the stars??

No, it does not.

Harte

First of all, hi there Indigo (don't fret, I am NOT here to cause you any trouble, I have learned that I am totally incapable of doing that in the past)

I just wanted to point out a few facts you did get right this time.

Fact #1: ALL humans are from India

Fact #2: ALL culture/civilization/achievements/technology/perfection is of India

Fact #3: Alexander the Great (why the name, he didn't do anything notable after all) NEVER even reached India (he is NOT referred to in any Indian text, is he?), nor was there ANY Greek (or with significant Greek influences) settlement in the west coast of India (and it is historically proven that Hyphasis river is NOT in India, nor is Indus river where Alexander found Alexandria on the Indus). I truly doubt if he ever ventured east of Granikos river (propaganda that defiles Indian supremacy was at play even then). The fact that he died 3 years after this campaign can fall in the category of "shortly after" (we're talking human years, not Brahma years, so it IS shortly after)

Fact #4: When the THEORY is contradicted by facts, we deface the facts - the THEORY HAS to be correct since it is about India.

Fact #5: Texts, religious texts, ARE evidence enough, no material finds are necessary (they ARE essential AND demanded if someone tries to disagree though).

Fact #6: No other translation of a dead language is acceptable but the enlightened one, all contradicting translations are the fruit of propaganda and evil intentions.

Fact #7: In mathematics, proof has no value at all, since in Indian texts and by Indian idiosyncrasy no proof is given whatsoever - all those generations of mathematicians simply wasted their lives trying to prove...what? The obvious!

Fact #8: A "nobody" is someone, anyone, who says something, anything, contradicting the greatness of India.

Fact #9: In 10AD both the Muslim religion (and invasion) and the Ottoman empire were there, for all the world to see.

I believe there are other facts that I omitted and I apologize for that, it only took 3 hours of my life (that I am never getting back) to read through all this and since I am no Indian (TG) I am prone to errors such as this (and more severe I am sure).

I have only one request. Since neither my English nor my Indian is strong enough, can you please abstain from using Indian words that I don't understand? Words such as "ethos", "Astronomy", "Astrology", "Democracy", "emphasis", "philosophy", "technology", "mathematics", "economy/economic", "planet", "centric", "myth/mythology", "grammar", "theory", "politics/political", "demonize", "hymn", "mono/polytheistic", "sophisticated", "surgery", "academic", "chronology", "metallurgy", "tyrannical", "archaeological/archeology". It may make it more difficult to confer your message across but that is the price you pay for having such an influential civilization as origin. Plus, the English language is rich enough in its own right so you won't have problems finding alternatives.

Thanks for bearing with me. Congrats on the effort. This African salutes you

India was not a single entity.

Some of the European genes comes from the Indian Sub-continent.

My guess is the opposite of the usual theory. I suspect that they were generally people FLEEING their assigned place in the culture.

The lowest of the castes or the inconvenient warriors taken from the lower castes. Or both.

Sucks to have the Omega come home and find that they've somehow mixed it up and become the Alpha.

Originally posted by Maegnas
First of all, hi there Indigo (don't fret, I am NOT here to cause you any trouble, I have learned that I am totally incapable of doing that in the past)

I just wanted to point out a few facts you did get right this time.

Fact #1: ALL humans are from India

I dont think he said that, read the posts properly else, I believe some people do have comprehension issues, its alright.

Fact #2: ALL culture/civilization/achievements/technology/perfection is of India

He didn't say that either, you seem to have comprehension issues, a very serious problem.

Fact #3: Alexander the Great (why the name, he didn't do anything notable after all) NEVER even reached India (he is NOT referred to in any Indian text, is he?), nor was there ANY Greek (or with significant Greek influences) settlement in the west coast of India (and it is historically proven that Hyphasis river is NOT in India, nor is Indus river where Alexander found Alexandria on the Indus). I truly doubt if he ever ventured east of Granikos river (propaganda that defiles Indian supremacy was at play even then). The fact that he died 3 years after this campaign can fall in the category of "shortly after" (we're talking human years, not Brahma years, so it IS shortly after)

Alexander the Great came upto Punjab(Pakistan's punjab) and had nearly gotten himself chewed. But, it was the rise of the chandragupta maurya empire which rolled the tide over. I think again you have comprehension issues.

Fact #4: When the THEORY is contradicted by facts, we deface the facts - the THEORY HAS to be correct since it is about India.

You are definitely suffering from comprehension deficit my friend.

Fact #5: Texts, religious texts, ARE evidence enough, no material finds are necessary (they ARE essential AND demanded if someone tries to disagree though).

In India Religious texts were not written the way it is written else-where. Anyways there..evidences available, to support what INDIGO has posted in the thread. It is you who has to show sources of your claims. Else, you still are not very intellectual to argue with, in my opinion.

Fact #6: No other translation of a dead language is acceptable but the enlightened... the fruit of propaganda and evil intentions.

If you are referring to Sanskrit as a dead language, then eat this mate:
In a village in Karnataka still sanskrit is spoken in daily life. Apart from this its spoken in every temple in India, amongst the priests. Dont speak on things you have no knowledge of.

Fact #7: In mathematics, proof has no value at all, since in Indian texts and by Indian idiosyncrasy no proof is given whatsoever - all those generations of mathematicians simply wasted their lives trying to prove...what? The obvious!

Yes, Ramanujam, Aryabhatta, Bhramabhatta , Bhaskara all were Africans.Very right! So may be you are describing the African way of Mathematics?? grow up!!

Fact #8: A "nobody" is someone, anyone, who says something, anything, contradicting the greatness of India.

Oh thats simply uncomment-able.because it isn't making any sense to others and me alike.

Fact #9: In 10AD both the Muslim religion (and invasion) and the Ottoman empire were there, for all the world to see.

You are the one who got confused and mixed up with his post. Its ok Sometimes brain doesn't process information.

I believe there are other facts that I omitted and I apologize for that, ....and since I am no Indian (TG) I am prone ..this (and more severe I am sure).

You are another cyber attention gainer who has barely learnt the art of logical thinking.

Thanks for bearing with me... This African salutes you

I am laughing and I have just fallen down from my chair reading your rant! I am not African (TG). So you cant take the credits away from India.

[edit on 23-7-2010 by Karthik1981]

Some way overdue responses

1. That There are no Harrapa-Mohenjodaro Civilizations

Can you show me where I said that?

2.That there exists no city called Dwarika: which is directly related to Krishna.
when you would search and find its evidence you would know what I am referring to.

Again, can you show me where I said that?

3. Vimanas huh? No I dont have any proof of that. and I am not taking it seriously. But, if you care then go and read Kapila Maharishi's texts on Vimanas.

Until someone finds remains of a vimana, physical remains, let's leave it at "there is no proof of those". Which is what I said, time and again, anyway, in that other thread.

4. DNA test? I was just replying to your "I am not Indian(TG)". You think am a racist?

No, I don't think you are racist and I am not directly African myself, I am Greek. But, as biology and genetics show, we are all Africans in origin

5. So you claim that Indian Mathematicians didnt exist?

I was replying to Indigo when he claimed that, according to Indian idiosyncrasy, proof is not needed in mathematical theorems. I never denied the existence of Indian mathematicians and surely I never denied the influence of India in mathematics and other sciences. And one case of "mistaken identities" cannot act as a proof for alleged centuries of suppression and/or conspiracy. It might, if someone boosts the past so much that there is no way to prove it was so, then claim there are no proofs because of "the conspiracy" that's going on. If facts are taken into account it is a bit harder to fabricate such conspiracies.

When a language is no longer usable to communicate it is more or less dead, for usual intends and purposes. Like Latin or Ancient Greek, many people speak them, in scholarly institutes, religious institutes and the likes. If you cannot use them on the street, for everyday use with everyday people, then those languages are dead. If ALL scriptures are gone and ALL speakers are dead then the languages are lost. It's merely semantics but it can make a difference!

I can see where you think I am an India basher though. Indigo had ticked me so much that, from one point on, I bashed India too along with him. for that I apologize, for bashing him I don't!

Terrific thread dude.

I enjoyed your info and I will continue reading it. To bad Laurel and Hardy screwed up the first couple of pages. I found it to be a real bugger, getting through those first few pages.

They already had the U2U system installed way back in 2009, right ?

---

I understand the ancient origins go way back, and they are in fact still the main reason for me to think that there was once a more advanced civilization around, or aliens of course... That disappeared, but not without influencing the cultures of modern times.

You have showed more proof of history being written by those in power, for that.

A despicable, unnecessary corruption of time... And what for ? Anyones personal civilization ends ( if they are lucky ) an estimate of 70 years after they were first introduced with it.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and ideas. I'm looking forward to read the rest of the thread.

First, the praise: well cited, well put together, i have believed much of it to be true for quite some time. I believe the Indian civilization to be the oldest that we will be able to trace. It doesn't make it the pinnacle. That whole "absence of evidence" thing.

Now for the other stuff....

....i normally would not have read this thread, as it is authored by someone referencing "indigo child", which i absolutely detest. On the bright side, kudo's for teaching me to abide by that wholde "judging books by their covers" mantra.

If you wanted to make a scholarly thread, you fell far short. You show that you have a predisposed belief. Of course, you have good data to back that up. But to someone who needs convincing, your defense of the Hindu religion, and wallowing in the mud with the Muslims here, only makes your case look weaker.

It gives the sense of agenda driven drivel.

Like i said, i believe much of it to be correct and accurate (based on my own studies). But it does come across as a little improper once you start arguing with others, rather than just presenting your story and minimizing the sidebars.

As BFFT noted this thread is tainted by the same arrogance that once infected 19th and 20th century European writings on culture and technology.

Its one of those human things to say 'we did if first'.

The facts do not support much of what was proposed here. You would do better to retool your document to outline those facts that actually support what good things the people who lived their did (before there was an 'India' there) and what you'd like them to have also done.

Quote mining and taking material out of context is an excellent way to get your ideasl laugh at.

@ FurryTexan
Ya know, I tried to tell the OP that very same point sometime last year. He has some compelling opinions and the topic is interesting, but how can you take it seriously when it's written by an "Indigo Child"?

Sorry to derail thread, I'm just glad I'm not alone on that one.