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.

 

Who Really Discovered America?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by toreishi
i personally don't give a hoot whatsoever who discovered the americas and i'm wondering what do these people who care a lot about this think they're doing. are they trying to make a religion out of this? in the same way that jesus or mohammad or buddha or whoever discovered divine enlightenment and gave humans the basics of compassion, what?


Not the everyday remark one would expect.


Should we not at least TEACH our Children the truth? Is it not our responsibility as somewhat educated bipeds , to have some level of integrity and honesty in expressing OUR mutual history in these lands?

Now, I frankly care very little about the Chinese matter, since like Columbus, they are relatively late to the Shores of this Hemisphere.

We know for fact, the Vikings had many ventures into the Heart of the North America, which predate Columbus by 100's of years. The Kensington Runestone is a prime example of evidence to show this clearly and definatively. But again, this is again, a more recent event, compared to the B.C. contact that seems to be screaming for attention, and I hope this is brought out in the up and coming show.

Our History as it currently sits, suggests based solely upon assumptions that our ancestors where somehow less than we are today. Backwards simpletons incapible of simple navigation. Even the "backdrop" of the 1500 Mindset, makes Columbus out to be a nut, who is going to fall off the planet.

I do not believe any of this is even acurrate. If we have evidence of structures on this planet that defy "Known" methods of construction, and built utilizing craftsmanship that we could never duplicate, means we are being told a lie.

That lie creates a basis of false teachings, which lead us today to the mindset that Columbus Discovered America.

Now, we have several indications that contact occured on this Hemisphere long before these "recent" Visitors.

As an example, we have the Legend of Naylamp from an ATS post on finds in South America.


" The Legend counts that Naylamp came from the ocean with his people in a large fleet of rafts. They built large cities and palaces and their culture prospered peacefully for many century at his place of burials".

An idol named Yampallec that recalling Naylamp, was worshipped at his of his place of burial. Today, the name of this idol remains alive as that of the most important departments of northern Peru, Lambayeque.

Many years after Naylamp´s death his tomb was profaned and, as consequence, 30 consecutive days of rain (El Niño? ), destroyed towns and crops as punishment to those who dared to disturb Naylamp' s tomb. . . "

(Legend collected by Miguel Cabello Valboa and reproduced in "Miscellanea Antarctica", una historia del Peru Antiguo. Universidad Mayor de San Marcos. Facultad de Letras, 1951.) .


This is just an example of things that "Tend" to be ignored. DNA would make this difficult to do, if the decendants are from the Pacific Isles.

We also see Pumapunka, and again, see evidence that surpases what such enlightened beings, (we think we are), can do today.

There is a past to this Hemisphere that has been buried under the footsteps of the more recent visitors to hit the beaches here. The distruction of the records, (by Clergy) of the Incan's sheds light on just one example of this defilement.

We need to reclaim our Lost/Stolen History and highlight it, apposed to creating a day to celebrate an event that frankly took place thousands of years earlier by many, who have all left their calling cards for us to see. To paraphrase Luke 19:40 "the stones would immediately cry out.", if only we took the time to listen.

Anyhow, if I ranted, sorry, but to think it matters very little about the truthbeing presented apposed to fabricate lies being worshiped, so be it. I just do not share the belief that ignorance is bliss.

Ciao

Shane




posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 04:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Alexander the Great
 


Obviously the Native Americans where here before the Europeans. The Native Americans came here from Asia thousands of years ago when there was an ice bridge that connected Asia and North America. Also, you are wrong, books do discuss how they came first, you just haven't read from the right source.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 12:25 PM
link   
now if we all are truly sincere about our desire to accept and acknowledge the truth, then we'd stop this discussion right here 'coz the above poster already said it. there were homo sapiens in the landmass called america by the time the chinese or the europeans happened to stumble on her shores. they came through the ice bridge connecting alaska and siberia.

[edit on 6.20.10 by toreishi]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by toreishi
now if we all are truly sincere about our desire to accept and acknowledge the truth, then we'd stop this discussion right here 'coz the above poster already said it. there were homo sapiens in the landmass called america by the time the chinese or the europeans happened to stumble on her shores. they came through the ice bridge connecting alaska and siberia.


Wasn't an ice bridge...there was so much water tied up in the glaciers that sea level was lowered, exposing a land mass called Beringia, and also exposing a much larger coastal plain.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Alexander the Great
 


Hello, not so long ago an American TV program postulated that beings known as 'Clovis people' went to America between 15,000 and 10,000 years ago from what now known as the Basque region of Spain, and the other side of the piranees, France, it stuck in my mind because of the likeness of flint spear heads found on both continents. 'they' think the Clovis people navigated their way across the Atlantic, in boats much like those the Inuit used to make, animal hide and wood/bone



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Wasn't an ice bridge...there was so much water tied up in the glaciers that sea level was lowered, exposing a land mass called Beringia, and also exposing a much larger coastal plain.


I'll pick on you Johnny, since I expect two things.

One.

You are able to defend your position with FACTS

Two.

You do not take things personally.

So, Beringia eh?

Reviewing some of the Info within Wiki, it struck me this seemingly is discussing a time period which other texts of varying topics would point to the Golden Age of Mankind.

That pinnacle of intelligence, we are striving to obtain and reclaim today.

The Mythos many cultures, as well as the evidence they left us to bewildered at, suggest enlightenment was at it's apex some 15000 Years ago.

All that have the Pantheon of the gods, as a basis of beliefs at one time or another point to this period as when the Pantheon interacted and ruled.

Now with this noted, I truly wonder if it was simple wanderers crossing this area refered to as Beringia, or if as I have contested previously in many other posts, that others, not of simple Asain Origin meandering around the wastelands of the Siberian Tundra, arrived here and remained.

We can also review the following offerings Donnelly prepared for us.


CHAPTER III.
AMERICAN EVIDENCES OF INTERCOURSE WITH EUROPE OR ATLANTIS.

1. ON the monuments of Central America there are representations of bearded men. How could the beardless American Indians have imagined a bearded race?

2. All the traditions of the civilized races of Central America point to an Eastern origin.

The leader and civilizer of the Nahua family was Quetzalcoatl. This is the legend respecting him:

"From the distant East, from the fabulous Hue Hue Tlapalan, this mysterious person came to Tula, and became the patron god and high-priest of the ancestors of the Toltecs. He is described as having been a white man, with strong formation of body, broad forehead, large eyes, and flowing beard. He wore a mitre on his head, and was dressed in a long white robe reaching to his feet, and covered with red crosses. In his hand he held a sickle. His habits were ascetic, he never married, was most chaste and pure in life, and is said to have endured penance in a neighboring mountain, not for its effects upon himself, but as a warning to others. He condemned sacrifices, except of fruits and flowers, and was known as the god of peace; for, when addressed on the subject of war, he is reported to have stopped his ears with his fingers." ("North Amer. of Antiq.," p. 268.)

"He was skilled in many arts: he invented" (that is, imported) "gem-cutting and metal-casting; he originated letters, and invented the Mexican calendar. He finally returned to the land in the East from which he came: leaving the American coast at Vera Cruz, he embarked in a canoe made of serpent-skins, and 'sailed away into the east.'" (Ibid., p. 271.)


He goes on with other curious observations.


"In Yucatan the traditions all point to an Eastern and foreign origin for the race. The early writers report that the natives believe their ancestors to have crossed the sea by a passage which was opened for them." (Landa's "Relacion," p. 28.)

Samé, the great name of Brazilian legend, came across the ocean from the rising sun. He had power over the elements and tempests; the trees of the forests would recede to make room for him (cutting down the trees); the animals used to crouch before him (domesticated animals); lakes and rivers became solid for him (boats and bridges); and he taught the use of agriculture and magic. Like him, Bochica, the great law-giver of the Muyscas, and son of the sun--he who invented for them the calendar and regulated their festivals--had a white beard, a detail in which all the American culture-heroes agree. The "Samé" of Brazil was probably the "Zamna" of Yucatan.


Donnelly even offered some circumstancial things to consider, which bears noting when discussing such thoughts.


CHAPTER IV.
CORROBORATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

1. LENORMANT insists that the human race issued from Ups Merou, and adds that some Greek traditions point to "this locality--particularly the expression μέροπες ἄνθωποι, which can only mean 'the men sprung from Merou.'" ("Manual," p.21.)

Theopompus tells us that the people who inhabited Atlantis were the Meropes, the people of Merou.

2. Whence comes the word Atlantic? The dictionaries tell us that the ocean is named after the mountains of Atlas; but whence did the Atlas mountains get their name?

"The words Atlas and Atlantic have no satisfactory etymology in any language known to Europe. They are not Greek, and cannot be referred to any known language of the Old World. But in the Nahuatl language we find immediately the radical a, atl, which signifies water, war, and the top of the head. (Molina, "Vocab. en lengua Mexicana y Castellana.") From this comes a series of words, such as atlan--on the border of or amid the water--from which we 'have the adjective Atlantic. We have also atlaça, to combat, or be in agony; it means likewise to hurl or dart from the water, and in the preterit makes Atlaz. A city named Atlan existed when the continent was discovered by Columbus, at the entrance of the Gulf of Uraba, in Darien. With a good harbor, it is now reduced to an unimportant pueblo named Acla." (Baldwin's "Ancient America," p. 179.)

Plato tells us that Atlantis and the Atlantic Ocean were named after Atlas, the eldest son of Poseidon, the founder of the kingdom.

3. Upon that part of the African continent nearest to the site

of Atlantis we find a chain of mountains, known from the most ancient times as the Atlas Mountains. Whence this name Atlas, if it be not from the name of the great king of Atlantis? And if this be not its origin, how comes it that we find it in the most north-western corner of Africa? And how does it happen that in the time of Herodotus there dwelt near this mountain-chain a people called the Atlantes, probably a remnant of a colony from Solon's island? How comes it that the people of the Barbary States were known to the Greeks, Romans, and Carthaginians as the "Atlantes," this name being especially applied to the inhabitants of Fezzan and Bilma? Where did they get the name from? There is no etymology for it east of the Atlantic Ocean. (Lenormants "Anc. Hist. of the East," p. 253.)

Look at it! An "Atlas" mountain on the shore of Africa; an "Atlan" town on the shore of America; the "Atlantes" living along the north and west coast of Africa; an Aztec people from Aztlan, in Central America; an ocean rolling between the two worlds called the "Atlantic;" a mythological deity called "Atlas" holding the world on his shoulders; and an immemorial tradition of an island of Atlantis. Can all these things be the result of accident?


In my own little world, (which does get lonely sometimes), the answer is NO.

It is just something we wish to pawn off as Lore and Mythos. The basis of this resides in denial. We must deny this, because if it is true, Society, in general, will lose itself. We can not accept any of this mindset, or everything we have been led to believe is for nothing and would register at best as a lie.

But that's the matter in a nutshell, isn't it?

And just for you my friend, I recall you have an affection for the Basque, and I figure this is due to your belief of them coming to the Americas.

Others do not quite see it that way, and with that said, take a look at what Donnelly offers to us for consideration.


5. How can we, without Atlantis, explain the presence of the Basques in Europe, who have no lingual affinities with any other race on the continent of Europe, but whose language is similar to the languages of America?

Plato tells us that the dominion of Gadeirus, one of the kings of Atlantis, extended "toward the pillars of Heracles (Hercules) as far as the country which is still called the region of Gades in that part of the world." Gades is the Cadiz of today, and the dominion of Gadeirus embraced the land of the Iberians or Basques, their chief city taking its name from a king of Atlantis, and they themselves being Atlanteans.

Dr. Farrar, referring to the Basque language, says:

"What is certain about it is, that its structure is polysynthetic, like the languages of America. Like them, it forms its compounds by the elimination of certain radicals in the simple words; so that ilhun, the twilight, is contracted from hill, dead, and egun, day; and belhaur, the knee, from belhar, front, and oin, leg. . . . The fact is indisputable, and is eminently noteworthy, that while the affinities of the Basque roots have never been conclusively elucidated, there has never been any doubt that this isolated language, preserving its identity in a western corner of Europe, between two mighty kingdoms, resembles, in its grammatical structure, the aboriginal languages of the vast opposite continent (America), and those alone." ("Families of Speech," p. 132.)

If there was an Atlantis, forming, with its connecting ridges, a continuous bridge of land from America to Africa, we can understand how the Basques could have passed from one continent to another; but if the wide Atlantic rolled at all times unbroken between the two continents, it is difficult to conceive of such an emigration by an uncivilized people.


In closing the material offered is from Donnelly's work, Atlantis, the Antediluvian World and IS worth reviewing.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shane
the material offered is from Donnelly's work, Atlantis, the Antediluvian World and IS worth reviewing. Ciao
Shane


A very quick review of your source material revealed the old 19th century canard that cast doubts on the ability of the First Nations to have constructed the Mississippi Mounds...and that the Moundbuilders fled south to Mexico under assault by the native population: 'The hostile nations which attacked them came from the north' www.sacred-texts.com...

Fact is, the culture came north from Central America. Remnants of the culture existed in Florida when the Spanish came through and are well documented.

Also..."...no authentic remains of the Mound Builders are found in the New England States, nor even in the State of New York." (same source)... is wrong. You have an manifestation of the same culture not 100 miles from you in Serpent Mounds, on Rice Lake. In fact, I am currently investigating a site in Kawartha Lakes that is said to rival it.

Your source was written in 1882. Not only does it pre-date Carbon dating, but it also serves as a racist ploy to disenfrancise the First Nations from their lands and resources.

That's all I can deal with right now. You are, with respect, entitled to believe whatever you want, but you might want to check out Meltzer's "First Peoples in a New World: Colonizing Ice Age America" www.ucpress.edu... for a better understanding. Or perhaps Fagan's "Ancient North America: The Archaeology of a Continent" for a serious but readable overview.

The real story is always better...



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alexander the Great
Why does no one ever mention Native Americans.
When did they arrive here? They had to have been here before anyone.
Right? maybe I'm mistaken.


There are a number of tribes that claim in their history to have come from over the sea in ships at some point. Both on the east and west coast.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   
I have an account here and will post it as soon as I can....written by a ships captain on an early expoloritory mission on the unpper east coast US. Early 1500s. Been a while that I last looked at it.

He anchored near marthas vineyard. The local tribe came out to the shore near the ship with a very large haul of raw copper in backpacks and the like. He couldnt figure it. He took some of it just to make them happy and noted thier displeasure that he wouldnt take it all.

This account is so valuable simply because the captain didnt know what he was really witnessing. Also the account is part of the ships log.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Logarock]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock
I have an account here and will post it as soon as I can....written by a ships captain on an early expoloritory mission on the unpper east coast US. Early 1500s. Been a while that I last looked at it.

He anchored near marthas vineyard. The local tribe came out to the shore near the ship with a very large haul of raw copper in backpacks and the like. He couldnt figure it. He took some of it just to make them happy and noted thier displeasure that he wouldnt take it all.

This account is so valuable simply because the captain didnt know what he was really witnessing. Also the account is part of the ships log.


Interesting story, and I look forward to reading more of it. Just wanted to make the point, though, that copper was highly sought after by the First Nations, which might have accounted for their displeasure at being essentially rebuffed by the Europeans who did not seem to appreciate its value.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Gawd, this question use to get me into so much trouble as a kid back in school. DUH, Columbus didn't discover squat. There were already people here when he arrived, so how could ANYONE have proclaimed to discover it (except for a racists pig). I mean, should I cruse on over to Europe today and proclaim "Gee, look what I discovered!"
The very idea of a Columbus Day is RACIST!



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Logarock
I have an account here and will post it as soon as I can....written by a ships captain on an early expoloritory mission on the unpper east coast US. Early 1500s. Been a while that I last looked at it.

He anchored near marthas vineyard. The local tribe came out to the shore near the ship with a very large haul of raw copper in backpacks and the like. He couldnt figure it. He took some of it just to make them happy and noted thier displeasure that he wouldnt take it all.

This account is so valuable simply because the captain didnt know what he was really witnessing. Also the account is part of the ships log.


Interesting story, and I look forward to reading more of it. Just wanted to make the point, though, that copper was highly sought after by the First Nations, which might have accounted for their displeasure at being essentially rebuffed by the Europeans who did not seem to appreciate its value.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]



Well they saw the ship and brought the copper out thinking they were there for the copper is my read on it. And when the cap didnt want it they were confused. Like hay you guys alway take copper.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Logarock
I have an account here and will post it as soon as I can....written by a ships captain on an early expoloritory mission on the unpper east coast US. Early 1500s. Been a while that I last looked at it.

He anchored near marthas vineyard. The local tribe came out to the shore near the ship with a very large haul of raw copper in backpacks and the like. He couldnt figure it. He took some of it just to make them happy and noted thier displeasure that he wouldnt take it all.

This account is so valuable simply because the captain didnt know what he was really witnessing. Also the account is part of the ships log.


Interesting story, and I look forward to reading more of it. Just wanted to make the point, though, that copper was highly sought after by the First Nations, which might have accounted for their displeasure at being essentially rebuffed by the Europeans who did not seem to appreciate its value.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]



Well they saw the ship and brought the copper out thinking they were there for the copper is my read on it. And when the cap didnt want it they were confused. Like hay you guys alway take copper.


Either that or..."Hey, our guys always take copper, what's with you?"

Copper was soft enough to use without smelting, an art that was unknown to the First Nations of the northeast at that time. The Europeans didn't need copper in the same context, though it had value to them. I'd be interested in the original source, because there are other copper stories out there.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 



Ok I will make a point on getting that up before the end of the day.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Shane
 


Ya looks like a good show but in all reality no one discovered America it was always here, just like the rest of the planet. A better show would be who discovered Earth! lol



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Logarock
I have an account here and will post it as soon as I can....written by a ships captain on an early expoloritory mission on the unpper east coast US. Early 1500s. Been a while that I last looked at it.

He anchored near marthas vineyard. The local tribe came out to the shore near the ship with a very large haul of raw copper in backpacks and the like. He couldnt figure it. He took some of it just to make them happy and noted thier displeasure that he wouldnt take it all.

This account is so valuable simply because the captain didnt know what he was really witnessing. Also the account is part of the ships log.


Interesting story, and I look forward to reading more of it. Just wanted to make the point, though, that copper was highly sought after by the First Nations, which might have accounted for their displeasure at being essentially rebuffed by the Europeans who did not seem to appreciate its value.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]



Well they saw the ship and brought the copper out thinking they were there for the copper is my read on it. And when the cap didnt want it they were confused. Like hay you guys alway take copper.


Either that or..."Hey, our guys always take copper, what's with you?"

Copper was soft enough to use without smelting, an art that was unknown to the First Nations of the northeast at that time. The Europeans didn't need copper in the same context, though it had value to them. I'd be interested in the original source, because there are other copper stories out there.


I am still looking.

On copper smelting they did find in Ohio and Tennessee copper smelting rigs built with ceramic intake and exhaust ports suspended in small mounds. They apparently had a way to force air to get the temps they needed.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
A very quick review of your source material revealed the old 19th century canard that cast doubts on the ability of the First Nations to have constructed the Mississippi Mounds...


Question for you personally Johnny.

Are you of the First Nations Peoples? You certainly seem to wish to defend them with vigor my friend. If So, that's great. If Not, I know there are MANY First Nations Peoples on this Site, and if they feel hurt or as if they are being presented with falsehoods and lies, then they are more than welcomed to correct this for us all.

Problem is, that canard you point to, speaks to the Origins of the First Nations, and without understanding the situation, and the preplexing examples that seem either ignored or overlooked, as Donnelly has done, then none are serviced, be it us, wishing to examine matters as fully as possible, or the First Nations themselves, who maybe are being misrepresented within the MAIN STREAM media.

Here you have opted to ignore the original points I wished to express and discuss, and honed in on a specific topic I frankly had no previous educational or reference materials to review. I respect what Donnelly presented in his work. I noted it IS worth reviewing, because of the un-answered points he brings together. I did not say his work was ROCK SOLID on every aspect.

My self, I see flaws in somes of his arguements, but what I presented to you goes unanswered to this day.

But maybe the case sensitive nature of First Nations Peoples is tooo much for us to discuss, because it seems to be taken as some unsult hurled at your direction and despite what I noted eariler, is being taken personally.

Now, with that said, you bring up a interesting topic in it'self. The Mound Builders, are quite unique peoples. Yes, they come from Mexico, since it is apparent in what they have found within the Mounds. I would not have presented Donnelly's Chapter on the Mound Builders for any discussion. The points or questions left for us to consider are valid, but yes there are many little facts that were misunderstood at the time, and this leads me to think the Questions or consideration left for us to ponder, maybe skewed. I trust you will understand this.


Fact is, the culture came north from Central America. Remnants of the culture existed in Florida when the Spanish came through and are well documented.


Remnants of this culture appear in more places than just Florida.

Hows England Sound?


THE GREAT SERPENT MOUNDS.--The feature which has captivated the public interest most in the Mound Builders is their great serpent-shaped mounds. That these serpent mounds were symbolical there can be no doubt. Serpents of various patterns and designs have always, from the beginning of religion, played an important part in religious ceremonies, not among one particular race but among all ancient people from the time symbols were first used.

One of the most important of the American Serpent Mounds is situated at Brush Creek near Peebles, Ohio. I cannot say definitely in what way this Serpent Mound was symbolically used--whether as the Seven Great Commands of Creation, the Waters, or the destruction of Mu, the Motherland. Possibly it may have included two of the foregoing. That it, or ceremonies connected with it, referred to Mu there is ground for belief for the following reason: it is stated that some of the Serpent Mounds have sacrificial stones or altars upon them, with the possibility that all had them originally. As Mu went down it was into "a fiery abyss," fires of the underneath. It became a custom among all surviving peoples thereafter at various times and occasions to commemorate her destruction by fire. Fire is shown to have been used in commemorative services by the Mayas and Quiches who had their fiery house, and the Egyptians who used a fiery tank, and others who used burnt sacrifices of some description.

In England near Stonehenge there is a Serpent Mound said to be an exact duplication of the American at Peebles, Ohio. Thus, we find in England a specialized symbol of the same as used by the Mound Builders of America, and in both cases the same meaning and conception is conveyed. What is a reasonable deduction? Common origin, without doubt. By what route did the Mound Builders get into England? It is questionable when we trace the various symbols that have been found in England, and the still more pronounced display found in Egypt.



Also..."...no authentic remains of the Mound Builders are found in the New England States, nor even in the State of New York." (same source)... is wrong. You have an manifestation of the same culture not 100 miles from you in Serpent Mounds, on Rice Lake. In fact, I am currently investigating a site in Kawartha Lakes that is said to rival it.


As you have noted, here, in Ontario Canada, we have Rice Lake. Why would be my question.

I have fished there a few times, and have seen the serpent mounds. I am sure once the Kawartha Site is investigated, MORE such sites will become apparent, should of course the Site you are speaking about actually be what you are expecting.


Your source was written in 1882. Not only does it pre-date Carbon dating, but it also serves as a racist ploy to disenfrancise the First Nations from their lands and resources.


And we ALL know how accurate Carbon Dating has turned out.

Here, I welcome any and all First Nations Peoples within ATS to step up and have a say.

Please tell us what Donnelly, or others may have wrong, in the supositions they have massed for us to review.

The Mound Builders themselves have many curious items that they have let in the America's, that are representations of curious items from around the Globe. They also appears to have a SACRED understanding of many matters.


Always enjoy our discussions Johnny.

Talk with you later.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shane

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
A very quick review of your source material revealed the old 19th century canard that cast doubts on the ability of the First Nations to have constructed the Mississippi Mounds...

Question for you personally Johnny.
Are you of the First Nations Peoples? You certainly seem to wish to defend them with vigor my friend. If So, that's great. If Not, I know there are MANY First Nations Peoples on this Site, and if they feel hurt or as if they are being presented with falsehoods and lies, then they are more than welcomed to correct this for us all.


I have to leave a quick response, as your questions require some thought and poking around and I am currently bogged down with other, time-sensitive stuff.

No, I am not of the First Nations, but as one who is interested in regional archaeology, it is a mistake to separate the living people from their ancestors, who occupy much of the archaeological record.

So, I am not a "wanna-be"or a "should'a- been"...I just try to exercise a degree of respect in conducting my investigations.

The rest will have to wait a while. In the meantime, when doing your own studies, don't forget the maxim..."Don't step in that, Wilbur..."

...and look up Sheguiandah for something a mite more substantial.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 07:37 AM
link   
I think it was the chinese as it wasn't too far away plus wasn't there once a landbridge that connected the two?



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
I don’t think anyone disputes that Columbus did not in fact discover America.

The following is personal opinion only;

I personally wonder if Columbus did not in fact know there was a continent here and knowing this sailed not for the West Indies, but instead for a land that he hoped he could pillage and take from it what he wanted, hoping to make more of a profit than if he had to barter with the peoples of the West Indies.

What he was not expecting was there to be a civilization here already, and thus to avoid being embarrassed called them “Indians”. Even though there was a civilization here already he was able to take advantage of their naivety (there beliefs differed from that of the Europeans about property and such) and still make a profit.

Due to this there was an influx of “explorers” who came to strip this land and its people of everything they could. Thus he was not the one to discover America, but to discover that America could easily be stripped of everything that the Europeans wanted. And that is what he is still being celebrated for today.

This ends my opinion for now.

AC



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join