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.

 

why were ancient australian aboriginals left out of annunaki influence

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by squandered
reply to post by theRhenn
 


There are many pure blood aboriginals left. My friend married one and he brags that she's pure blood. She has very strong bone structure and goes crazy when she drinks, but he says she makes up for with love and he really loves her.

The red ore look, is iron oxide. Australia is a giant mine these days!


If this is really true, I believe you. The reason I say this is.. I watched a history channel documentary (anyone remember the mutual of omahaw (spelling?) wild kingdom? It was there that I understood that the purest decent died around the 30s or 80s. I cant remember which. Its been so long. I'll have to dig into this a bit more. If your correct, I stand corrected


Iron oxide huh? Ore for gold? Its usually found around iron right?




posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 04:07 AM
link   
The aborigines probably did have something amazing, but was stolen during the invasion of the english.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 04:24 AM
link   
The Aboriginal dreamtime is very interesting and good to read up about.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by DC449
The Aboriginal dreamtime is very interesting and good to read up about.


dreamtime does not stop your babies dying in severe droughts sigh

the only way to even out the years of famine with years of plenty is agriculture and to produce more than you can eat so you can save some for the bad years

nothing can compensate for loss of an entire family to famine - i dont care what great spiritual connection and dreamtime stories there are

NOTHING can compensate for watching your babies die of hunger in years of drought and lack of food and shortage of prey to hunt



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Redevilfan09
 


Wrong; they made it to NZ and the Antartica as well.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


You are a liar, an 'ad hominem' scoundrel and a detractor from truth to the world.

Almost every time I see your posts they wind up being a blood-boiling inducement to anger - that you would try so hard to prove someone or something as a 'thing to be ridiculed'. Instead, the reader will understand, that a person or line of enquiry remaining not fully explored should not be labelled in such a scurrilous way (by people whose minds are obviously firmly closed).

The academic community has a growing restlessness, a sense of unease about it's crumbling control on the fields of anthropology, archaeology, ancient history and the like. Weedwhacker is the indirect result of that unease, in tandem with the concerted efforts of power brokers in key positions across the globe - those who wish the truth to remain buried in the sands of time. The academic community bolsters and promotes those who cling to the crumbling paradigms, who knowingly or unknowingly support the shadow-leaders in their quest to keep the truth hidden.

Sitchin upset the establishment, and there has been a concerted effort at character assassination ever since his first work in archaeology/ history/ anthropology was published. Multi-discipline generalists are not welcomed by the establishment, as they can be a dangerous threat to the secrecy agenda. Weedwhacker is simply promulgating the legacy of those wounded scholars and power-brokers.

Disregard his 'ad hominem' attacks on Sitchin. Disregard his lies about the Annunaki, and work it out for yourself.

Read Sitchin's books, read up on Sumerian history and their exhaustive textual records - you will see that the Annunaki (AN.UNA 'gods') most definitely did exist. I don't agree with everything Sitchin wrote, but to write him off as a fraudster is a complete load of BS. His work was exhaustive and incredibly well-sourced.

The sense of sheer amazement that you get when considering some of his theories, or even just the way in which he lays out the evidence/ archaeological indicators and so forth - it just needs to be experienced, with an open mind. The world is a much more incredible place when you open your mind to the possibilities. The truth will out, as they say.

Don't just stop with Sitchin, read from other contributors to the field - such as Alan F Alford - in particular his excellent 'Gods of the New Millennium'. There's plenty of actual evidence out there to PROVE that our origins and pre-history were tied up with the 'gods'. What form (alien, advanced human, 'fallen angel' etc) or purpose (benevolent, self-serving, heretical etc) the 'gods' had, remains up for debate and study, but they certainly existed.

Sumerian Text Corpus - a useful resource to directly check the Sumerian records (via translators whose allegiances are obviously tied up with academia; a fact that doesn't detract from some of the translations, which are plain-as-day indications of technological resources being used by the 'gods' as they physically interacted with humanity).


Alan F. Alford is an interesting case. His seminal work 'Gods of the New Millenium' took a strict line that the gods were flesh & blood beings, who literally interacted with the people of earth (genetically engineered by the gods in the first place) Several years after he wrote that amazing work (again, I don't agree with everything he wrote, but most is pretty 'spot on') he had an amazing change of heart, and resorted to an ephemeral, symbolic mythological construct in his 'understanding' of the subject of gods and pre-history - diametrically opposed to the idea of literal gods who came down and wrought engineering/societal/genetic enhancement wonders on Earth.

A strange state of affairs, and one which leads me to suspect that he was indirectly or directly threatened with an ending of his academic career if he didn't play by the establishment rules. You can see from this extract on his website a microcosm of the 'about face':

Alan F Alford's site: Myth-Religion

The first half of the page reads more or less as his old theories did. The second half reads like something from the wishy-washy, highly embellished greco-roman myths, generally not held held to be truth (the un-romanticised in poetry state of affairs) until millennia after the Sumerians.

In general, the Sumerians were plain and 'down to earth' in respect of their relationship with the gods. They seemed to view them as real people, who really visited them, who had actual, physical interactions on Earth; everything from making love to waging war. The evidence of their presence is abundant; the establishment wants it to remain under wraps. Don't believe the disinfo.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by zenius
 


"our indigenous" so when did you start owning people...



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment
 


I can only agree with you word for word.
It seems that the closer people come to the truth, the more ridicule they recieve.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   
It's unfortunate that most aboriginals have lost their ways now, most live in "missions" paid for by the government and are substance abusers, so bad to the point where a large majority of these missions have total alcohol bans.
The rest live in cities and towns and are usually on government welfare living in affordable accommodation also known as housing commission and spend their days down by the river drunk catching some bream cus.

There are however some abo's that still live by tradition and these are the aboriginals that i really respect, very wise people that you can learn alot off and are extremely humble, these are the ones i call "true aboriginals".



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:07 AM
link   
The Australian aborigines are not alone. The Philippines' Aetas were also left alone. There are no ancient structures in the Philippines.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by squandered
 





Just to throw a spanner in the works.. The earliest aboriginals did harvest food, but later arrivals burnt down the continent, subsequently killing off all the mega fauna. There was nothing that could be farmed except the giant wombat, and that animal lasted 11,000 years after their arrival. Some of the groups hadn't learned to harvest fire, and on the east coast they all talk of pre-humans who were still there when settlers arrived... stories of the Yowi (Australia's big foot) involve recently extinct mega fauna. The smaller type are pre-humans


I wanna know more Squandered. are you black fella, or you reading from text? serious question





dreamtime does not stop your babies dying in severe droughts sigh the only way to even out the years of famine with years of plenty is agriculture and to produce more than you can eat so you can save some for the bad years nothing can compensate for loss of an entire family to famine - i dont care what great spiritual connection and dreamtime stories there are NOTHING can compensate for watching your babies die of hunger in years of drought and lack of food and shortage of prey to hunt


please send me links so i can read up on how babies died from drought, sh1t how many years ago

You are missing a huge point. they didnt need too, they farmed their land but not what you call farming reading from a text book. please understand this , Believe me mate if the hoppn dogs/ birds moved so did the black fella

Wal

ps dont anyone take offence with the black fella comment, because my mates/ brothers call me white fella in conversation



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by squandered
 


There is no such thing as a pure blood line Aboriginal.....their past can be found in PNG, Asia, India



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
Because they where/are Sumerian

sumerian culture and the annunaki
edit on 26-12-2010 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-12-2010 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)


I assume Australia was a long time ago attached to India
edit on 26-12-2010 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)


google maps Austalie
edit on 26-12-2010 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by wavemaker
The Australian aborigines are not alone. The Philippines' Aetas were also left alone. There are no ancient structures in the Philippines.


You clearly havent looked at both of their mythologies then, and as for ancient structures... that doesn't mean anything.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 





There is no such thing as a pure blood line Aboriginal.....their past can be found in PNG, Asia, India


links please i disagree


Wal



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Resistance creates revolution my friend. My direct ancestors of SE QLD were all Earth shamans and people of the spirit world. Very rarely did anything really create a stir great enough to make them want to revolutionize their way of life. If you knew your history, you would know of ingenuity in the tools and mechanisms used by the ancient aborigines, clearly they were extremely smart people adapted to their environment.

And your flawed statement comparing such an ancient race to the modern day aborigine is like saying modern day Egyptians, must be the words greatest architects because they built the pyramids.

Lets suppose for a moment that Stichen was right, and the Annunaki influenced ancient man...even if they did influence the ancient aboriginals, almost every trace of that would be most certainly destroyed. Did you ever learn what happened in Tasmania?



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I haven't read the entire thread, so forgive me if this MOST OBVIOUS item has been mentioned:

Why were the Harappan or pre-Hindu people not included in the whole Annunaki-Nibiru etc. song and dance (BS) routine?

Why were the early Yellow River/Chinese communities not included?

Why were the ALL people of the Western hemisphere, or "Native Americans," not included?

Why were the early Africans, or at least most of them (the sub-Saharans anyway), not included?

Why do arrogant WESTERN jerks think the ENTIRE world should be based on the mythology that was the forerunner of the Abrahamic-monotheistic song and dance (BS) routine?



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by B.Morrison

Originally posted by megabyte
there are not megalithic statues and pyramids and buildings in Australia - why? i think it is the only continent not to have ancient ruins of that type


Thats not correct man, the problem is that the sacred knowledge handed down to them by the Wandjina, etc is tied to sacred sites of actual land around australia - this means many of the structures etc are kept secret.


According to legend 10,000 years ago the Creator decided to manifest on earth (Tya) as a man. He sent a message by telepathy to all living things to gather at Moon Lake (Lake Narran) to wait for him to appear. When he asked them to clear the ground and there he made a circle representing his body, out of which all life comes. This circle would become an important part of Aboriginal life, as it is the place where initiation takes place. He told them the creation myth and why they had been placed on the earth. He instructed them to hold initiations for their youth. At the time of initiation a wise woman or man was to tell them the laws of living and how they were to fulfill the great plan for life, the things he was explaining to them at this first initiation. The circle was called a Bora and Boras have been drawn and used all over Australia for thousands of years. Access to these sacred sites (most of which are secret) is extremely important to Aboriginal life. All Bora sites are high-energy, sacred places.


In Central NSW extensive megalithic stone alignments and other astronomical structures dating back 10 000 to 15 000 years and which suggests the former presence in Australia of a highly advanced civilization of unknown origin. These structures include standing stones weighing 20 tons and carved stone heads.

In Western NSW 3 large human heads have been found carved out of granite boulders. The heads were found near mysterious stone alignment and other formations.

Source


Happy Holidays!
-B.M




really where? i'll visit them tomorrow



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by megabyte
 


Perhaps they were wise enough to escape the sphere of influence of the Watchers. The Aboriginals are a very spiritual people, perhaps they saw the Watchers for who they are.

Also there is a recurring pan-australian myth of the Rainbow Serpent:


In 1926 a British anthropologist specialising in Australian Aboriginal ethnology and ethnography, Professor Alfred Radcliffe-Brown, noted many Aboriginal groups widely distributed across the Australian continent all appeared to share variations of a single (common) myth telling of an unusually powerful, often creative, often dangerous snake or serpent of sometimes enormous size closely associated with the rainbows, rain, rivers, and deep waterholes.[20]
So unlike other cultures, while they respected the power and wisdom of the snake, they saw it as a dangerous entity. Bear in mind that this myth is known by all of the Aboriginals across Australia. They also have a sort of Pantheistic view of the Universe/God that one might call a less defined Monotheism (like the great spirit among the Native Americans, but more esoteric).

My theory is that they seperated themselves from the original humans of the Middle East and migrated to Australia to escape the corruptive influence of the Watchers. The Native Americans must have done the same, but if we look at Central America and the Southern United States we can conclude that the Watchers caught up with their ancestors who went back to worshipping them.



posted on Dec, 26 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by megabyte
 



so what are some other theories?


?? That Zacharia Sitchin was full of it? A hoaxer. Scam artist.

That no such thing as the "Annunaki" existed?

Those are some reasonable theories, I do say....


Of course its a possibility. Do we have any proof that he is completely wrong? No. Anything is possible. Its best to keep an open mind.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join