reply to post by Hanslune
As i stated earlier regarding this, I said I'd poke around.
You may certainly be correct in regard to nicotine, as research on the topic indicates samples at levels indicative of dietary ingestion as opposed to
habitual use as is want to occur once one gets hold of some good stogies.
Regarding the coca product, as it stands, the jury is still out, and results continue to be independently verified by many numbers of puzzled
scientists, even those initially detracting from the first results highlighted by the paper published in 1992 through the respected German scientific
periodical, Naturwissenschaften, by toxicologist Svetlana Balabanova.
is a basic summary of events at least up to the
posting of this article posted in Oct. 2011.
is an academic paper from S. A. Wells, discussing the topic.
is a short bump by Addiction Reporter dot com done in Sept of 2011.
also is another article on the habits of Egyptians.
Granted, while I ascribe to potential contact and trade between old world and new well outside orthodoxy, some of these papers though discussing the
subject and asking questions detract from that stance, or simply state there is no other supporting evidence in that direction.
Thus, the question still stands: How did coca product with such prevalence permeate Egyptian, African, and Asian Continental societies?
Flipping back an answer that 'some other kind of plant with coca-like qualities must have existed' similar to stating some very vague unnamed,
un-sourced plants contain levels of nicotine sufficient to cause positive results around the African, European and even Asian continents, is not
Scientists working in this field, with hands on regarding this subject are asking the same questions, and I've yet to see any of these plants named,
though vague elusive responses from detractors assert these plants do indeed exist.
Some sources that are not vague, or any kind of elusive would be nice. I'm more than reasonable.
Faced with good data, I'm more than willing to question my own stance. I hope so far I've already demonstrated such.
As it stands though, from resources over the past year, the question about Coca product in old world mummies still stands, is still quite very
relevant, but, the mainstay of orthodox is extremely reluctant to explore the subject further, and seemingly content to let the unsettling question
lay on a shelf for the next generation of bright eyed young historians, anthropologists, and other such to come along and risk the ruination of their
Edit: I've also just noticed your 'Howdy' response.
Off topic, but have you been looking at some of my posts/work?
I want to add and be clear that I'm not entirely on board with a subscription to the assertion that Atlantis was a singular city/state/culture/empire
as described in Pato's telling.
It would be nice, and quite very interesting for sure, but, lack of evidence of such as you've asserted supports this as a lower probability.
As I think I've stated before, I'm more in favor of a subscription to the postulation that 'Atlantis' was more a generalized term used to describe
primarily, the South American Continent as a whole where telling and retelling of this 'Atlantis' over generations until reaching Plato picked up
assertions, embroidery, biases, and other warping that fashioned a generalized continental geography into a romantically epic empire.
My argument is more from the stance that there was sustained organized trade contact between old and new world cultures, if only for certain
perishable/consumable products unique to the Americas that don't have the best of shelf lives as pottery and hard good do. Import of Coca, tobacco,
distilled/fermented drinks from maize, and other such unique products may have been more economical for such long and hazardous voyages as opposed to
collecting heavy hard goods like pottery, gold, etc that could be found in more convenient ports of call.
edit on 20-3-2012 by nineix
because: (no reason given)