Twin Ancient Cultures On Opposite Sides Of The Pacific

page: 17
87
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
The reason I mentioned Mormons at all was because if the fraud was done by a Mormon, then it likely wouldn't be called "pious."

IOW, Mormons are well known for fabricating "evidence" that tends to corroborate their religious mythos.

I don't know if a Mormon did it. I do know that, whoever did it, they used an insertion character (caret) and some periods in ways that have never been seen in paleo Hebrew.

Harte


And how do we know the person who inscribed it just simply didn't make typos? Why are we holding them to a higher grammatical standard than modern society if we are supposed to be more intellectual? I think typos are possible on any inscription.




posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by Harte
The reason I mentioned Mormons at all was because if the fraud was done by a Mormon, then it likely wouldn't be called "pious."

IOW, Mormons are well known for fabricating "evidence" that tends to corroborate their religious mythos.

I don't know if a Mormon did it. I do know that, whoever did it, they used an insertion character (caret) and some periods in ways that have never been seen in paleo Hebrew.

Harte


And how do we know the person who inscribed it just simply didn't make typos? Why are we holding them to a higher grammatical standard than modern society if we are supposed to be more intellectual? I think typos are possible on any inscription.


The caret was used to insert part of the Ten Commandments that the writer accidentally left out. If you want to call that a "typo," then okay.

However, the caret (and the periods) indicate that the person who carved on the stone was not using any known form of PaleoHebrew. Rather, they were trying to imitate PaleoHebrew.
That was my point, and not why the caret was used.

As I said, no such insertion mark is used in the language the script is written in. Nor are periods, though both appear on the stone.

This indicates a much later date for the stone than the language itself would indicate, hence the likelyhood of fraud, pious or otherwise.

Harte



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by Harte
The reason I mentioned Mormons at all was because if the fraud was done by a Mormon, then it likely wouldn't be called "pious."

IOW, Mormons are well known for fabricating "evidence" that tends to corroborate their religious mythos.

I don't know if a Mormon did it. I do know that, whoever did it, they used an insertion character (caret) and some periods in ways that have never been seen in paleo Hebrew.

Harte


And how do we know the person who inscribed it just simply didn't make typos? Why are we holding them to a higher grammatical standard than modern society if we are supposed to be more intellectual? I think typos are possible on any inscription.


The caret was used to insert part of the Ten Commandments that the writer accidentally left out. If you want to call that a "typo," then okay.

However, the caret (and the periods) indicate that the person who carved on the stone was not using any known form of PaleoHebrew. Rather, they were trying to imitate PaleoHebrew.
That was my point, and not why the caret was used.

As I said, no such insertion mark is used in the language the script is written in. Nor are periods, though both appear on the stone.

This indicates a much later date for the stone than the language itself would indicate, hence the likelyhood of fraud, pious or otherwise.

Harte


Think about this, if Paleo-Hebrew were discovered recently through archeology, and the person who imitated Paleo-Hebrew on the artifacts, they would have had to lived prior to the discovery. At that time, those discoveries were held mainly in academia. We today have access to viewing such things and you and I are aware of Paleo-Hebrew, but neither you nor I have been trained in the language and it appears that sentences were formed, therefore it contains a message.

If there is a message, then the person who imitated them must also be aware of what the words meant. That can only come from two ways, either the person was knowledgeable about Paleo-Hebrew because they were taught it and used it in communication, or the person scratched meaningless words and got lucky.

Can you name any school, university or institution that has taught Paleo-Hebrew in the last hundred years? Or even in the last thousand years? People were learning Latin, Greek and Hebrew. I have never read one source anywhere that says "he was well-versed in Paleo-Hebrew". All those ancient documents and tablets were never decoded until the Rosetta Stone, and then it was because of the Greek inscribed on it.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Think about this, if Paleo-Hebrew were discovered recently through archeology, and the person who imitated Paleo-Hebrew on the artifacts, they would have had to lived prior to the discovery. At that time, those discoveries were held mainly in academia. We today have access to viewing such things and you and I are aware of Paleo-Hebrew, but neither you nor I have been trained in the language and it appears that sentences were formed, therefore it contains a message.

It does contain a message. The message is the most well-known part of the Torah, the Ten Commandments.

Also:


The first recorded mention of the stone is in 1933, when professor Frank Hibben, an archaeologist from the University of New Mexico, saw it. Hibben was led to the stone by an unnamed guide who claimed to have found it as a boy in the 1880s. The 1880s date of discovery is important to those who believe that the stone was inscribed by a lost tribe of Israel. The Paleo-Hebrew script is practically identical to the Phoenician script, which was known at the time, thus not precluding the possibility of fraud. One argument against the stone's antiquity is its apparent use of modern Hebrew punctuation, though amateur epigrapher Barry Fell argued that the punctuation is consistent with antiquity.[1] Other researchers dismiss the inscription based on the numerous stylistic and grammatical errors that appear in the inscription.
Source
Please note that the first mention was in 1933, well after Paleo Hebrew was being taught. Also note that it is almost identical to Phoenician, which was known even at the time that the discovery is claimed to have happened - and there's no evidence for this earlier discovery date.


Originally posted by WarminIndy
Can you name any school, university or institution that has taught Paleo-Hebrew in the last hundred years? Or even in the last thousand years? People were learning Latin, Greek and Hebrew. I have never read one source anywhere that says "he was well-versed in Paleo-Hebrew". All those ancient documents and tablets were never decoded until the Rosetta Stone, and then it was because of the Greek inscribed on it.


Paleo Hebrew is taught in every single University where ancient languages are taught. If you search online, you can even find vids of people teaching it.

Harte



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by WarminIndy


We may never know exactly what it was or who wrote it, but with as many languages out there and the many different writing systems people used, I think more research should be devoted to it.
Omniglot

Much that has been passed off as Cherokee is strange to me because I had to do a project in art school about typography and the subject was Sequoyah's Syllabary. The Cherokee did not have a written language prior, Sequoyah would have known that if they did.

Paleo-Hebrew is taught now, my point however, was that Paleo-Hebrew was not taught prior to 1855. That was the first time any reference was made and it was still considered Phoenician at the time. At that point, it was not being taught because archeologists were just becoming aware of it. Joseph Smith did not know Pheonician and neither did Brigham Young. What they may have seen was borrow symbols that hucksters used to proclaim as an actual written language when buying and selling Egyptian "artifacts".

I still say that if the person was only imitating Paleo-Hebrew, they got really lucky in the ten commandments. Written communication depends completely upon the writer using letters that form words and sentences. If I were to do this...my brother does this to me all the time...agdiggoddd googedjdhdldges..dddasadeffjeeccdeet.

Certainly I used Latin based fonts but is there anything in that you would find makes any sense? I am imitating a language we both know, but without using those letters correctly, I have just made senseless babble. So if the person were merely imitating, they got incredibly lucky in making a comprehensible statement. I can't buy that.
edit on 9/13/2012 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy
[We may never know exactly what it was or who wrote it, but with as many languages out there and the many different writing systems people used, I think more research should be devoted to it.
Omniglot

Much that has been passed off as Cherokee is strange to me because I had to do a project in art school about typography and the subject was Sequoyah's Syllabary. The Cherokee did not have a written language prior, Sequoyah would have known that if they did.

Paleo-Hebrew is taught now, my point however, was that Paleo-Hebrew was not taught prior to 1855.

And, again, the first reference to the Decalogue is in 1933. That is, we have some local that claimed to have seen it as a child but for all we know, he may have been the one that carved it.


Originally posted by WarminIndy
That was the first time any reference was made and it was still considered Phoenician at the time. At that point, it was not being taught because archeologists were just becoming aware of it. Joseph Smith did not know Pheonician and neither did Brigham Young. What they may have seen was borrow symbols that hucksters used to proclaim as an actual written language when buying and selling Egyptian "artifacts".

Mormons today are still fabricating history to match their beliefs. Remember the physicist in the 9-11 "truthers" movement? (I forget his name right now - it'll come to me.) Jones, that was it. He wrote a paper at Brigham Young University concerning the similarities he saw between a Mayan god and Jesus Christ, inferring that Christ came to the Americas, just like ol' Joseph and his magic translation machine had said.


Originally posted by WarminIndy
I still say that if the person was only imitating Paleo-Hebrew, they got really lucky in the ten commandments. Written communication depends completely upon the writer using letters that form words and sentences. If I were to do this...my brother does this to me all the time...agdiggoddd googedjdhdldges..dddasadeffjeeccdeet.

Certainly I used Latin based fonts but is there anything in that you would find makes any sense? I am imitating a language we both know, but without using those letters correctly, I have just made senseless babble. So if the person were merely imitating, they got incredibly lucky in making a comprehensible statement. I can't buy that.

You don't buy that. Neither do I. The difference is I believe the carving is a fake. You think it might be real. If it's fake, everything about it is explained. If it's real, then why do we have not a single shred of evidence for the migration of an entire people from the Middle East to the Americas? At the very least, there would be some genetic evidence. There is not.

Harte



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Harte
 

The Mayans and the Balinese do look similar. I bet there is a genetic tie.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 


There is, about 25,000 years ago they probably had a common ancestors in eastern Asia. Both come from Asian stock.

Do you remember Ishii? He was the last 'wild' California native American he called the white men one name but called the first Japanese he meet by the same terms he used for his own tribe - he recognized them as 'cousins'.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by WarminIndy
[We may never know exactly what it was or who wrote it, but with as many languages out there and the many different writing systems people used, I think more research should be devoted to it.
Omniglot

And, again, the first reference to the Decalogue is in 1933. That is, we have some local that claimed to have seen it as a child but for all we know, he may have been the one that carved it.
I should have mentioned the source was for the written language and not the decalogue itself. The first reference was in the New York Times in 1855.




Originally posted by WarminIndy

Mormons today are still fabricating history to match their beliefs. Remember the physicist in the 9-11 "truthers" movement? (I forget his name right now - it'll come to me.) Jones, that was it. He wrote a paper at Brigham Young University concerning the similarities he saw between a Mayan god and Jesus Christ, inferring that Christ came to the Americas, just like ol' Joseph and his magic translation machine had said.

I know the Mormon church does that, however I will stress my first points about the Red Bird Petroglyph. Certainly no local or no Mormon did that because it was known to the early pioneers in Kentucky. This was before Mormons. And on that, you would have to prove the Mormons were teaching Paleo-Hebrew at Brigham Young prior to 1933.I don't think they were. But as you assert, someone must have learned it somehow, so when was it first taught?



You don't buy that. Neither do I. The difference is I believe the carving is a fake. You think it might be real. If it's fake, everything about it is explained. If it's real, then why do we have not a single shred of evidence for the migration of an entire people from the Middle East to the Americas? At the very least, there would be some genetic evidence. There is not.

Harte


Again, we don't need an entire group of people to migrate. I don't think I proposed that. Suppose only 50 people came here, that is still enough for one person to inscribe something. And there is indeed genetic evidence in a small percentage of Native Americans. That small percentage only needs a few ancestors, not a large group. Could it maybe be possible that a small group of people migrated?

Ohio Decalogue Stone

This article is from Ohio State University. And in looking at the Los Lunas stone, it appears that not only that stone was inscribed, but many of them. Los Lunas

So we have to ask this, suppose someone did indeed know enough Hebrew and inscribed it, at the end of the day it is still a stone with the ten commandments on it.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by Harte
Mormons today are still fabricating history to match their beliefs. Remember the physicist in the 9-11 "truthers" movement? (I forget his name right now - it'll come to me.) Jones, that was it. He wrote a paper at Brigham Young University concerning the similarities he saw between a Mayan god and Jesus Christ, inferring that Christ came to the Americas, just like ol' Joseph and his magic translation machine had said.

I know the Mormon church does that, however I will stress my first points about the Red Bird Petroglyph. Certainly no local or no Mormon did that because it was known to the early pioneers in Kentucky. This was before Mormons. And on that, you would have to prove the Mormons were teaching Paleo-Hebrew at Brigham Young prior to 1933.I don't think they were. But as you assert, someone must have learned it somehow, so when was it first taught?

I thought the subject was Las Lunas. The Red Bird engravings have no actual provenance. They are similar to Cherokee markings and it has been argued that older markings have been altered in the modern era.

What do you think the odds are that eight different cultures were represented passing by the same stone on the same river, halfway around the world from their homes? Wouldn't such an occurance be expected to indicate a rather large commonality of transoceanic voyaging, a commonality for which there is no decent evidence in the extensive written records we now possess of some of these extict cultures?

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by HarteYou don't buy that. Neither do I. The difference is I believe the carving is a fake. You think it might be real. If it's fake, everything about it is explained. If it's real, then why do we have not a single shred of evidence for the migration of an entire people from the Middle East to the Americas? At the very least, there would be some genetic evidence. There is not.

Harte


Again, we don't need an entire group of people to migrate. I don't think I proposed that. Suppose only 50 people came here, that is still enough for one person to inscribe something. And there is indeed genetic evidence in a small percentage of Native Americans. That small percentage only needs a few ancestors, not a large group. Could it maybe be possible that a small group of people migrated?

Ohio Decalogue Stone

This article is from Ohio State University. And in looking at the Los Lunas stone, it appears that not only that stone was inscribed, but many of them. Los Lunas

Do you think that a handful of people would cross the Atlantic (or Pacific) and then trek 1500 miles inland before they realized they could have been carving on all these stones lying around?

Harte



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy


Originally posted by Harte


I thought the subject was Las Lunas. The Red Bird engravings have no actual provenance. They are similar to Cherokee markings and it has been argued that older markings have been altered in the modern era.

What do you think the odds are that eight different cultures were represented passing by the same stone on the same river, halfway around the world from their homes? Wouldn't such an occurance be expected to indicate a rather large commonality of transoceanic voyaging, a commonality for which there is no decent evidence in the extensive written records we now possess of some of these extict cultures?

Do you think that a handful of people would cross the Atlantic (or Pacific) and then trek 1500 miles inland before they realized they could have been carving on all these stones lying around?

Harte


Actually I did mention the Red Bird Petroglyph and substantiated my discussion about it through several posts.
When did the Cherokee first have a written language? Sequoyah developed the Syllabary that was finally integrated in 1828. Why was Sequoyah not aware these marking were part of a language? Sequoyah grew up in his mother's world of the Cherokee.

Were they eight different cultures, or eight different people at the same time? If they were eight different people at one time, would there be a huge deal about it? Are you proposing that I believe large numbers of migrating people came here, each one at different times and left their mark on the same stone because they all used the same inland trails? I do not think that.

First Nations and Sequoyah

However, some oral historians contend that the written Cherokee language is much, much older. But even if there was an ancient written Cherokee language, it was lost to the Cherokees until Sequoyah developed the syllabary.


It appears the Cherokee are denouncing that concept. Here are two images of the Judacalla Rock carvings.


Tell me how that evolves into something similar to Paleo-Hebrew.
Ancient Wall Markings This was in 1828, just after Sequoyah's syllabary and you can see it is clearly the syllabary.

If something appears in a place that is out of the ordinary, such as the Los Lunas, written in an ancient language earlier than that of the Native Americans living in the area, it is quite easy to say it is a hoax. But to prove a hoax there needs to be culprits. Has any culprit been found for Los Lunas?

This is the information about where the Hebrew may have been taught to the person, if the person were Mormon, Joseph Smith apparently learned Hebrew

The Hebrew class was taught from January 26 to March 29, 1836 by Joshua Seixas, a Jewish man who had converted to Christianity. The previous year, Seixas had taught at Oberlin College in Ohio, where Lorenzo Snow attended. Snow was not a member of the church at that time, although he would later join and would eventually become a prophet. He took classes from Seixas and wrote to his LDS (Mormon) sister about how much he enjoyed the teacher. His sister, Eliza R. Snow, was currently living in Joseph Smith’s home. She passed along the information to the prophet, who sent emissaries to hire Seixas. Seixas taught forty students during the course.


It would be easy to go to Oberlin and find anything about this man, as he was a professor there. But to say it only took three months to learn Hebrew, that is extraordinary. All one would have to do is compare the Los Lunas Stone to Professor Seixas work. But Professor Seixas would know the proper Hebrew, would you not think so? But the original point was the Paleo-Hebrew, the Los Lunas stone carries Paleo-Hebrew, Hebrew and Greek. So I can agree maybe about the Hebrew and Greek being taught, but not the Paleo-Hebrew.

It may indeed be a Mormon fraud in the Los Lunas stone, but that does not address the other artifacts in other parts of the United States. You can't pass them all off as Mormon hoaxes.
edit on 9/15/2012 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)
edit on 9/15/2012 by WarminIndy because: Endquotes get me every time



posted on Sep, 17 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Actually I did mention the Red Bird Petroglyph and substantiated my discussion about it through several posts.
When did the Cherokee first have a written language? Sequoyah developed the Syllabary that was finally integrated in 1828. Why was Sequoyah not aware these marking were part of a language? Sequoyah grew up in his mother's world of the Cherokee.

Here's how, it is now thought that the Cherokee formerly had a different written script:

Tankersley, member of the Cherokee Nation and Piqua Shawnee tribes, has since gone even further in his investigation between the links between petroglyphs and the Cherokee syllabary. He and colleague Andras B. Nagy now argue that it's possible Cherokee petroglyphs found in caves constitute a "stable system of graphic communication," which communicate narratives through "symbols and signs that range from figurative to abstract forms with meanings and concepts. As such, a Cherokee system of writing likely developed in the Ohio River valley prior to European contact."
Source

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Were they eight different cultures, or eight different people at the same time? If they were eight different people at one time, would there be a huge deal about it? Are you proposing that I believe large numbers of migrating people came here, each one at different times and left their mark on the same stone because they all used the same inland trails? I do not think that.

Unless you think that members of eight different cultures all arrived together at this single spot, then it would have to be several different trips made by several different cultures, wouldn't it?

How do you get eight different languages on a single stone when some of these cultures had no known contact with each other? How can this occur at a single site, yet not be seen at several other sites?


Originally posted by WarminIndy
Tell me how that evolves into something similar to Paleo-Hebrew.

Through imagination and vandalism, which I already told you.


Originally posted by WarminIndy
If something appears in a place that is out of the ordinary, such as the Los Lunas, written in an ancient language earlier than that of the Native Americans living in the area, it is quite easy to say it is a hoax. But to prove a hoax there needs to be culprits. Has any culprit been found for Los Lunas?

If you saw a giant gorilla hanging from the top of the Empire State Building, would you automatically assume that King Kong was real, simply because the culprit of the hoax was unknown?


Originally posted by WarminIndy
This is the information about where the Hebrew may have been taught to the person, if the person were Mormon, Joseph Smith apparently learned Hebrew

The Hebrew class was taught from January 26 to March 29, 1836 by Joshua Seixas, a Jewish man who had converted to Christianity. The previous year, Seixas had taught at Oberlin College in Ohio, where Lorenzo Snow attended. Snow was not a member of the church at that time, although he would later join and would eventually become a prophet. He took classes from Seixas and wrote to his LDS (Mormon) sister about how much he enjoyed the teacher. His sister, Eliza R. Snow, was currently living in Joseph Smith’s home. She passed along the information to the prophet, who sent emissaries to hire Seixas. Seixas taught forty students during the course.


It would be easy to go to Oberlin and find anything about this man, as he was a professor there. But to say it only took three months to learn Hebrew, that is extraordinary. All one would have to do is compare the Los Lunas Stone to Professor Seixas work. But Professor Seixas would know the proper Hebrew, would you not think so? But the original point was the Paleo-Hebrew, the Los Lunas stone carries Paleo-Hebrew, Hebrew and Greek. So I can agree maybe about the Hebrew and Greek being taught, but not the Paleo-Hebrew.

Given that Paleo Hebrew is almost exactly identical to Phoenician, which was a known language for quite some time prior to this, it wouldn't be surprising at all that a person that already knew Phoenician could learn Paleo Hebrew in a few months.

There's no real reason to believe that either of these artifacts are genuine. Obviously, that doesn't mean that you can't believe whatever you want.

Harte



posted on Sep, 17 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Todays ocean going ships have crews from many different countries and continents.

Doesn't it make sense that earlier crews were mixed too?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Not really, since a crew must be able to communicate with each other, and thousands of miles (and hundreds of years, in some cases) separated the various cultures supposedly represented here.

Harte



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
Not really, since a crew must be able to communicate with each other, and thousands of miles (and hundreds of years, in some cases) separated the various cultures supposedly represented here.

Harte


What are you saying here? That mixed nationality crews do not exist? Really?
Mixed Nationality Crews

When the Roman empire was expanded into other territories we know historically that they allowed the conquered people to retain their ethnic identities and languages. At that time. Greek was the predominant language. Even Alexander the Great allowed peoples under his empire to retain their identity and language.

Many ships had mixed crews.

Here is one example of a Berber Moor

Estevanico is known by multiple different names in a number of works. Among the most common are Arabic: إستيفانيكو‎; "Mustafa Zemmouri" (مصطفى زموري), "Black Stephen", "Esteban", "Esteban the Moor", "Estevan", "Estebanico", "Stephen the Black", "Stephen the Moor", "Stephen Dorantes" and "Esteban de Dorantes" after his owner Andres Dorantes,[10] and "Little Stephen")


You will notice that even though his name is in Spanish, he also was known by his Arab name. He was a Berber from Africa. Just because you see Spanish names on ships lists, do not assume they were all one nationality.
edit on 9/18/2012 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by Harte
Not really, since a crew must be able to communicate with each other, and thousands of miles (and hundreds of years, in some cases) separated the various cultures supposedly represented here.

Harte


What are you saying here? That mixed nationality crews do not exist? Really?
Mixed Nationality Crews

When the Roman empire was expanded into other territories we know historically that they allowed the conquered people to retain their ethnic identities and languages. At that time. Greek was the predominant language. Even Alexander the Great allowed peoples under his empire to retain their identity and language.

Many ships had mixed crews.

Here is one example of a Berber Moor

Estevanico is known by multiple different names in a number of works. Among the most common are Arabic: إستيفانيكو‎; "Mustafa Zemmouri" (مصطفى زموري), "Black Stephen", "Esteban", "Esteban the Moor", "Estevan", "Estebanico", "Stephen the Black", "Stephen the Moor", "Stephen Dorantes" and "Esteban de Dorantes" after his owner Andres Dorantes,[10] and "Little Stephen")


You will notice that even though his name is in Spanish, he also was known by his Arab name. He was a Berber from Africa. Just because you see Spanish names on ships lists, do not assume they were all one nationality.


I don't.

However, your example is recent, compared to the supposed glyphs. Also, please note that since around 1400 or so, contact between cultures has encouraged multilingualism. No such incentive existed when PaleoHebrew was arising.

Any mixed crew then would have almost certainly consisted of slaves and conscripts. People that typically not only could not write, but generally wouldn't be allowed to carve a message representing their culture.

I don't know how you imagine it, but you should be aware that cultures like the Egyptians literally despised most other cultures, even the ones they traded with. Do you believe that the same wouldn't be true for the other cultures supposedly represented there?

What is Red Bird Rock? A "We are the World" type benefit?

Harte



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Man, miss a few days, and holy crap. Tons of pages for review.


Originally posted by randyvs

In my thread " Gods of Academia " there's some pretty good discussion on the point you make. I to believe in a, " Golden age " and a mother culture that was Atlantris. " We are a species with amnesia " and the flood is the reason.


I agree in many regards to the premise you put forth, but I would suggest the Root is a combination of two events, rather than just the "Flood".

I would also apply the Day of Confusion of Language, as a contributor to the "LOSS of a HISTORY".

The Tale that is spoken of in Genesis that surrounded the period of the Tower of Babel.

Mischievous Mankind had done many things having a universal understanding based on a common tongue, (and the assistance of entities of questionable intent), and we are yet to comprehend and understand this.

We are a species that has been "dumbed down" to say the least.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Relevant: Richard Cassaro - Forbidden Ancient Wisdom Revealed

Glad to see the discussion in this thread





top topics
 
87
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join