Twin Ancient Cultures On Opposite Sides Of The Pacific

page: 8
87
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


I have been saying this and a few other people around ATS, this planet was a home to a global civilization thousands of years ago, and even millions of years ago. Thats why there are similarities, they all built their structures the same, they shared each others cultures and ideas, b/c it was a global civilization.




posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by guavas
 


I remember reading in here someplace, that one of the Temples in Mexico, had issues with some blocks being loosed due to being walked on and such. The underside of those blocks/tiles had what is described as Mason Markers or Builder marks, which apparently where a means to verify a Brick Count at the end of the days production.

If I find it, I will note it here.

Well that was easy. What a Fantastic Search Engine we have.


Comalcalco's Mysterious Mason Marks

Ciao

Shane



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Shane
 


I honestly don't know enough about such things, but I can say that you can date that stone by how the name of God is spelled. Can you show me where it is on the stone?

edit.

Well I found it. Bare in mind Jehovah is actually a curse against God and that Yahweh is the proper form of it (with some variations), Unfortunately you can tell that the stone is probably fake because the Hebrews only started using the term YHWH very recently in terms of their history.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Shane
 


It was written in modern Hebrew punctuation, not ancient. Now why is that? Answer, Because Hibben has been long since proven to be a fraud.

The only other explanation would be that the Spanish planted this on purpose in order to convert more natives. That to me fits right in with something that the inquisition would have done. After all, they almost wiped out most of the various peoples of the Americas history, as well as advanced technology.

However, I lean more towards Hibben being behind it. Either way, it's most likely just another hoax.

Oh and uh, I highly doubt that an Alien species that visited here in the past, had any interest whatsoever in spreading scriptures around planet Earth that are based on man made fairy tales. ~$heopleNation



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SheopleNation
 


They didn't wipe out any advanced technology. The only advanced peoples left were in Peru. Everyone else had already entered a dark age by the time of the arrival of the Europeans.

Frankly, the found cultures were evil compared to their glorious past. Many of them deserved extermination. But that does not mean the extermination of so many innocent was right.

I'm just letting you know, the culture they found when they landed was as backwards as Europe in the Dark ages.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by FoosM
 


Very cool.
The elephants really blow my mind.
Because if the scientists are correct. There is no way possible for a Mayan to have ever seen an elephant.
In fact it would be impossible.

So now we are left with.


  1. Either someone described or showed them an image of an elephant.
  2. They travelled somewhere there was an elephant
  3. Someone visited them with an elephant
  4. There were elephants alive in the americas at the time the image was carved


In either case it's a very strong case for mayans traveling great distances or someone traveling a great distance to visit them.


I would think Travel wasn't such a venture.

I would also consider one more thing for your list. Cave Drawings If we can find them today, they certainly could back then.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by SheopleNation
 


They didn't wipe out any advanced technology. The only advanced peoples left were in Peru. Everyone else had already entered a dark age by the time of the arrival of the Europeans.

Frankly, the found cultures were evil compared to their glorious past. Many of them deserved extermination. But that does not mean the extermination of so many innocent was right.

I'm just letting you know, the culture they found when they landed was as backwards as Europe in the Dark ages.


Just in mexico, everything north of that was pretty good, no genocide or nothing, everyone lived one with the planet, and im pretty sure the advanced technology was taken with the ancients "Power source for one man, but a bomb for another" if u know what i mean.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


There was no power source or anything.

And I wouldn't exactly call everyone to the North living in harmony with nature. They had their wars and campaigns and stories just as much as any culture did. To romanticize anyone is to be foolish with history. Simply put, no one was good. Every culture had some form of bloodshed, hatred, and problems.

And once you start looking a little deeper, it starts getting darker. The lost civilization in the Mississippi Valley, for example. And the fortresses that bare a sharp similarity in function to those found in post-Roman Europe in Late Antiquity. There's little evidence here and there that there was something big that went down. "Harmony with nature" was only a very few groups, and those were usually the most primitive, and often subject to many woes by their fellow natives as well as by the Europeans to come.

Much like the hippie communes that popped up in the dark ages, the hippie communes of the Americas made up only a few tribes and locals. Who can tell what was there before them, and what sins they might have committed.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


There was no power source or anything.

And I wouldn't exactly call everyone to the North living in harmony with nature. They had their wars and campaigns and stories just as much as any culture did. To romanticize anyone is to be foolish with history. Simply put, no one was good. Every culture had some form of bloodshed, hatred, and problems.

And once you start looking a little deeper, it starts getting darker. The lost civilization in the Mississippi Valley, for example. And the fortresses that bare a sharp similarity in function to those found in post-Roman Europe in Late Antiquity. There's little evidence here and there that there was something big that went down. "Harmony with nature" was only a very few groups, and those were usually the most primitive, and often subject to many woes by their fellow natives as well as by the Europeans to come.

Much like the hippie communes that popped up in the dark ages, the hippie communes of the Americas made up only a few tribes and locals. Who can tell what was there before them, and what sins they might have committed.


Primitive? what do u mean primitive?

If the ancients were hippies that can talk to one another across oceans using only their spirit, is that called primitive? And they were looked down by fellow natives, you speak as if you lived with them and ate with them?

Do you know why the europeans killed the natives? they were a threat to eastern way of life, b/c they were far more advanced, they did not need a king, or queen, nor did they need lawyers or schools or police officers, and that scared the europeans b/c that meant they could not control them, and if the general public were to see how they lived, everything around them would have seemed very primitive.

i mean, we need cars to get from point a to b, we need computers and calculaters to do our math for us, and thinking. and a nation that doesnt need any of those things in order to be succesfull is pretty damn advanced in my eyes.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91

They didn't wipe out any advanced technology. The only advanced peoples left were in Peru. Everyone else had already entered a dark age by the time of the arrival of the Europeans.


Where did you read that, in some Spanish revisionist history book that was written and documented by Men who believed in fairy tales? LMAO!


Frankly, the found cultures were evil compared to their glorious past.


Oh really? Well why don't you historically educate all of us misled modern day folks about that "glorious past" then? Talk about a monkey wrench. First you call them evil, but then somehow they were "glorious" in the past?


Many of them deserved extermination.


Why is that, because they practiced sacrifice? Maybe they did, or maybe they just killed their captured enemies.

Or did you mean, they deserved extermination because they didn't bow down to the Church and it's equally twisted doctrine?


But that does not mean the extermination of so many innocent was right.


I believe that is what people like you call "collateral damage" eh?


I'm just letting you know, the culture they found when they landed was as backwards as Europe in the Dark ages.


Finally, Now you and I can agree something. You can't expect a primitive people to be above European society even in the Dark Ages. Other than in, 'certain' technologies. But yes, Far from over all though. Otherwise, The Spanish never would have Conquered all of those tribes in the Americas.

My point is, technology will always vary with peoples. One culture might possess something that another more powerful culture does not. That is the way the World's peoples have come about since the beginning of time. Which was and still is, Learning from each other. ~$heopleNation
edit on 13-8-2012 by SheopleNation because: TypO



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


If they were far more advanced....they wouldn't have been killed off by guns and horses dude.

Whatever they were, whoever they were, they were long dead by the time of the European march on the continent.


Do not confuse past glory with present.

At most, they were as advanced as Rome. And when they were found, they were primitives. They had nothing but human sacrifice and religious zealotry....much like how Rome was after its fall.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SheopleNation
 





Where did you read that, in some Spanish revisionist history book that was written and documented by Men who believed in fairy tales? LMAO!


Claims, so many claims, so few sources.




Oh really? Well why don't you historically educate all of us misled modern day folks about that "glorious past" then? Talk about a monkey wrench. First you call them evil, but then somehow they were "glorious" in the past?


Yes. FYI, cultures do change. An evil people can have a glorious past, and indeed, a glorious people can have an evil past. Present is not past, nor future.




Why is that, because they practiced sacrifice? Maybe they did, or maybe they just killed their captured enemies. Or did you mean, they deserved extermination because they didn't bow down to the Church and it's equally twisted doctrine?


They deserved death for wholesale slaughter of their people to try and please their gods for more rain.




Finally, Now you and I can agree something. You can't expect a primitive people to be above European society even in the Dark Ages. Other than in, 'certain' technologies. But yes, Far from over all though. Otherwise, The Spanish never would have Conquered all of those tribes in the Americas. My point is, technology will always vary with peoples. One culture might possess something that another more powerful culture does not. That is the way the World's peoples have come about since the beginning of time. Which was and still is, Learning from each other. ~$heopleNation


And the people found by the Spaniard had neither power nor advancement. They were sky worshipers killing each other to false gods for rain. Such people are not capable of producing grand cities that they lived in, and ought not be compared to those that did such things.

Whoever built those cities and made that art, were not the Maya that the Spanish found. The people that the Spanish found were in the middle of cultural suicide and falling to their doom.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
They were sky worshipers killing each other to false gods for rain.


Sort of like the sky worshippers today killing each other to false gods for profit...



Such people are not capable of producing grand cities that they lived in, and ought not be compared to those that did such things.


Yet such people exist today and are capable...



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


No, they're not actually. People killing for gods don't build cities.

Of course, you can divide your population between the two, but good luck keeping that going indefinably.

There's times for war, and times for peace; times to destroy, and times to build. You cannot do both for long without collapse....you cannot destroy forever without collapse, and you cannot build forever without needing to eventually destroy.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


If they were far more advanced....they wouldn't have been killed off by guns and horses dude.

Whatever they were, whoever they were, they were long dead by the time of the European march on the continent.


Do not confuse past glory with present.

At most, they were as advanced as Rome. And when they were found, they were primitives. They had nothing but human sacrifice and religious zealotry....much like how Rome was after its fall.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


Like i said, in mexico, those guys did the killing good. And advanced doesnt mean you have the bigger weapon, thats what i do not like about todays society, the one with the bomb is the most advanced, thats primitive thinking right there dude. (bigger stick bigger brain)

Now i know the natives and the mayans didn't build those pyramids, were talking about the cultures that did, or civilizations, and what im was talking about, was the a global civilization exsisted thousands of years ago, which was far more advanced in technical and spiritual knowledge.

We still dont use electricity properly, instead of it making more energy, were just using it up, that's very primitive also, and child like. So when i say advanced i dont mean in weapons or such physical properties which says nothing about a nation and its advancements, take it like this, schools dont Educate you, they train people, Education is manners and experience that you gain in life.

So when i say advanced, i mean they were alot more Educated then us.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


Actually it's not primitive thinking. Advanced includes the ability to defend yourself.

Virtually every technology we have originated in defense or assault technologies. From fire, to the nuclear reactor.

The only exception to this rule might be art and architecture. Not even writing can be included, because it seems writing was created for either planning hunts or attacks on other humans.

Going with that, if you want to look at purely peaceful advancements like art and architecture, then pretty much very people on Earth peaked at that advancement a few thousand years ago, and have only advanced past that out of military technologies like steel and bunkers.


Like it or not, your focus on peace is not realistic.

And the Maya did build them. Just not the generation the Spaniards found.

This ancient so-called civilization has lots of data that it existed, but no data for what you are saying. Any and all evidence for ancient civilizations spanning the globe reveal them to be just as warlike, greedy, and horrible as we are today. They did not know more spiritually, nor know more culturally. They worshiped the same false gods that have always been worshipped, and fought wars for te same reasons that have always been fought. They blew themselves up like we will.

There is nothing to be gained from studying these long-dead ancestors other than a sad reflection of how little we have changed. They lived, fought, and died for the same reasons we do and did.

They are to be surpassed, not followed in their footsteps. Their footsteps only lead to destruction, for that is where they ended.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


All you have responded with is nothing short of reckless assumptions. You have made accusations against a people that you obviously know nothing about. Have you visited their ancient sites? Well, I have. Not only a few, but many.

But hey, knock yourself out if you actually believe that anyone swallows any of that mindless, condescending drivel. Let alone, your poor style of delivering your nonsense.


Then again, maybe that is your intention, cause that is the only reasonable conclusion that I can come to after reading many of your responses within this thread.

Hey guy, this just in................You don't know anything about these ancient peoples other than what your masters in the church wrote down for you in some book of recorded history that was psychologically backed up by some man made fairy tale.

You blind, weak minded, foolish mortals will never comprehend the truth, which is that The Universe is the only one true god. By all means though, continue on with your circus side show.

~$heopleNation



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SheopleNation
 


You don't have to visit the sites to see the difference between the culture that is printed on the walls and the culture described in first contact. Not to mention resorting to primitive retorts as "I was there, so I know better" in an age of google images, is sort of desperation on display on your part.

And you're insulting me, but you've yet to display a capacity to differentiate between the Mayan culture found, and the Mayan culture in the art and architecture.

Once again, cultures change. They advance, decay, stagnate, and move.

If you think they are the same, you're grasping straws.


If the people found do not conform to the display of advancement seen in their buildings, it's safe to assume they are the the people who built the city to begin with and are simply a generation that found themselves living in the work of other men.

The same can be observed by the Mycenaean occupation of Minoan society, Hun occupation of many societies, and Russian occupation of European society.

Cultures seen that do not match cultures built, are not the same cultures.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Fighting mister, is the most primitive act a being can do. Natives, did not have wars between each other, that was propaganda from the first missions to the newland, so that they would have an excuse to "help" them, just like today in middle east. "help" means eliminate the threat in buisness language


"and Russian occupation of European society", wrong, its the other way around. im russian, i would know.

You use google earth and images to find information? and your calling him primitive? man, you gotta step outside and cough up that programming bs out.

Computers are primitive, cars, calculators, the way we build our structures, weapons, army, religion, those are VERY primitive. Ancients were way past that, their building have lasted thousands of years when ours wont last past 150+ years mark.

Primates, so they say fought each other for land and food right? FIGHTING is primitive, and anything that comes out of it, is also primitive( that includes the technology)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


If Fighting is primitive, why live? You are fighting the inevitable death.

Also then, why did the North American pre-colonial civilizations build walls?

You don't build walls if you're peaceful.



what you say is simply your own opinion. And quite simply, an opinion that doesn't have a great deal of founding.


Any evidence for cities in North America usually include the presence of walls. And I don't know about you, but I wouldn't build walls around my city unless I felt threatened.

You might be interested in also the Mississippian stone statuary, showing warrior like men, the city of Cahokia, The Southeastern Ceremonial Complex and it's evidence for warlike-behavior, Mesa Verde, The Angel Mounds forts, The Etowah copper showing what looks like warriors with helmets, another Etowah copper of what looks like a man with a sword, and many others.
edit on 13-8-2012 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
87
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join