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.

 

Zana the Russian Bigfoot an African slave?

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   

cathar
Above is what is called "Sweeping generalities"...Is he saying there are no sunken ciies off Japan & Cuba...?

Of course there are.....Poor guy has not seen it on MSM TV so he does not believe it...


Uh no... it's become apparent (painfully so) that you're really not capable of holding a rational, semi-intelligent conversation. I've learned over the years that it's best not to argue with people like you.....

Here's your linky...
edit on 6-11-2013 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Blarneystoner

cathar
Above is what is called "Sweeping generalities"...Is he saying there are no sunken ciies off Japan & Cuba...?

Of course there are.....Poor guy has not seen it on MSM TV so he does not believe it...


Uh no... it's become apparent (painfully so) that you're really not capable of holding a rational, semi-intelligent conversation. I've learned over the years that it's best not to argue with people like you.....

Here's your linky...
edit on 6-11-2013 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)


OK so Blarneystone believes in what MS science is saying...So he must believe that jet fuel melted the steel
infrastructure that brought down the twin towers on 9/11....& I'm sure he gets his flu shot ever year like an obedient little believer in main stream science...& of course Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK....LMAO

MS scientists lie and fake test results all the time....It's a fact.....



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   

cathar

Blarneystoner

cathar
Above is what is called "Sweeping generalities"...Is he saying there are no sunken ciies off Japan & Cuba...?

Of course there are.....Poor guy has not seen it on MSM TV so he does not believe it...


Uh no... it's become apparent (painfully so) that you're really not capable of holding a rational, semi-intelligent conversation. I've learned over the years that it's best not to argue with people like you.....

Here's your linky...
edit on 6-11-2013 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)


OK so Blarneystone believes in what MS science is saying...So he must believe that jet fuel melted the steel
infrastructure that brought down the twin towers on 9/11....& I'm sure he gets his flu shot ever year like an obedient little believer in main stream science...& of course Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK....LMAO

MS scientists lie and fake test results all the time....It's a fact.....


Yeah... strawman much? Everything you just said reinforces my previous response to you. We're laughing our asses off too! ...but not with you... at you.

Thanks for the response, Aunt Sally...



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by cathar
 


I guess I am confused as to why race has to be brought into the discussion in the first place. Scientist are human and as such are both fallible and easy to manipulate. They are very often split depending on where their funding comes from. This is sad but you can find one to back any theory you want if it funds their research.

Look at the doctor on the news, the ultimate in science, took oath to never do harm but yet in 1500 cases he did not find one case of black lung. Of course they pretty much all had it. This is greed in action.

We know from finds that humans and neanderthal were here together for a time. For many this is proof we did not come from them but to others it means nothing and they cling to their beliefs we came from them.

You see it comes down to what you want to believe. To think we mated with Bigfoot or neanderthal is a pretty big stretch. As for race just remember, we started as one race and we will end as one. We get closer everyday.

The Bot



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   

cathar
MS scientists lie and fake test results all the time....It's a fact.....


If it werent for the fact that papers are peer reviewed so that others can attempt to duplicate the testable aspects and reproduce results Independently you might be on to something. However what you are claiming is a world wide, interdisciplinary conspiracy to make scientists your new god. It just isn't a reistic it feasible scenario.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:39 PM
link   

peter vlar

cathar
MS scientists lie and fake test results all the time....It's a fact.....


If it werent for the fact that papers are peer reviewed so that others can attempt to duplicate the testable aspects and reproduce results Independently you might be on to something. However what you are claiming is a world wide, interdisciplinary conspiracy to make scientists your new god. It just isn't a reistic it feasible scenario.
.com/

Excuse me for bursting your bubble but scientist faking tests results has been an ongoing problem for decades.
From the link below>>> "If misconduct is as rampant as these studies imply, scientists must start reporting dishonest behavior regularly........"

popsci.com...

you can google it and find a lot more information on this problem....
edit on 6-11-2013 by cathar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by cathar
 


You know... people like you really crack me up. You probably wake up every morning and either flip on the TV or jump on your PC, both developed by scientists. Then you eat your breakfast, certified as being safe by FDA scientists. Then maybe take a shower, brush your teeth, put on some deodorant, get dressed and your off to work. The water you shower with probably came from a treatment facility where the water has been treated by scientists so that it's free from bacteria and other nasty things. The toothpaste you brush your teeth with, developed by scientists. The deodorant; developed, tested and approved by scientists. The car you drive, the gas powering it, the roads you drive on.... all at some point have been touched by science in some way. The modern world you live in with all of it's luxuries and conveniences is a direct result of the work conducted by.... guess who... Scientists!!

(Did you get the answer right? Good, here's a cookie.)

The internet that we're having this wonderful coversation on? Developed by science... really! I'm not sh!tting you!

The TV signals that bring you the Honey Boo Boo show that I'm sure you love to watch... yep... satelites...that's right! Science mofo!

So... excuse me if I tend to listen and believe what science tells me. If I didn't I would be just like you... an ignorant fool who thinks that everyone is lying to him and they just don't get it.

Tell you what... go ahead and think the way you do... it makes no difference to me... but I think you need to understand just how dumb it makes you look.

That's a free pro tip...

You're welcome....
edit on 6-11-2013 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by cathar
 


I don't need to google anything. This is what I do day in, day out. I've never falsified data nor anyone I've ever worked with. There just is no world wide conspiracy between multiple competing disciplines. That's the entire reason for the peer review process. There are many examples of errors being found and hypothesis refuted once other scientists get the data and try to reproduce it. You're welcome to continue to live in an insular bubble though where putting fingers in your ears and yelling neener neener neener makes all the bad people's voices go away if it makes life more bearable for you.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 06:00 PM
link   

peter vlar
reply to post by cathar
 


. You're welcome to continue to live in an insular bubble though where putting fingers in your ears and yelling neener neener neener makes all the bad people's voices go away if it makes life more bearable for you.


@ Peter V,,,,you are confused ..The above is what YOU ARE doing.....I'm the one being realistic about the human propensity towards dishonesty....



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by cathar
 


Cute, you ignore the pertinent parts of how science really works and then obfuscating what the issue was by changing it to how people in general have a propensity towards dishonesty. In science, the peer review process weeds out the B S because its Independantly reviewed by multiple people TRYING to find errors. This has in many instances led to garbage hypothesis being tossed away. I've never once needed to, been asked to, seen anyone, or heard of anyone I know altering data to fit a preconceived idiom. Do some particular warped people occasionally alter data in an attempt to save their career despite inevitably and irrevocably destroying it anyway? Sure. Is it a common practice as you seem to believe? Absolutely not. Yes as humans even scientists are susceptible to greed. However most, like most non science minded folks are honest hard working people. There is no vast conspiracy to suppress knowledge. In fact the opposite is true. Every anthropologist and archaeologist in the world would love to be the one to break some paradigm altering discovery. The biggest frauds I see are people like Samir in Bosnia with his special ed pyramid or Sitchin's inability to actually read the texts he thought he was deciphering and further compounded his issues by inventing whatever sounded good to fill in the numerous blanks. The true frauds are the ones who pretend to be practicing science while actually destroying valuable items(like Samir has done with his insane back hoes digging into legitimate archaeological items).



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Archeological Coverups......

Paul V's debate strategy is to attack the messenger ...This is standard practice when you are defending the tainted world of academic science..especially archeology>>>>>>


edit on 6-11-2013 by cathar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by cathar
 


I'm not attacking the messenger, I'm attacking the legitimacy of their work. Fact- Sitchin completely fabricated information for his book. Fact, Sami has made a mess of any potential real archaeological work in Bosnia by using 19th century excavation techniques and actually destroying things. They are hacks plain and simple. I will however attack Childress directly since you posted the video. He has changed his stance and story so many times that he can't keep it straight. He's a profiteer selling books to the gullible. In the 80's it was all about Mu, Lemuria and Atlantis. He thought aliens had nothing to do with it at all. By the early 90's( I blame the X-Files) he was on the aliens bandwagon. by the early 2000's he denied aliens entirely again and by 2005 he was back on them as the origin for the Olmecs and head binding. He took the bulk of his info from Danikien and Sitchin, both of whom are frauds. He's a college drop out with no degree and no validity to be making the claims he does. Curiosity only gets you so far if you have no clue what you're interpreting. I used to be really into these books when I was a kid but sometimes you've got to put aside the incredulous saucer eyes and look at the evidence and see where it leads. He doesn't do that. He as well as many others, begins with a presupposition and works tangential evidence around it to weave a web of authenticity to those who don't know any better. Buy the books if you enjoy them, but there's no reality in them. I wish there was but it just isn't so.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   

cathar
Archeological Coverups......

Paul V's debate strategy is to attack the messenger ...This is standard practice when you are defending the tainted world of academic science..especially archeology>>>>>>


edit on 6-11-2013 by cathar because: (no reason given)


Unfortunatly I agree with you regarding the "science" of archeology... but so much of it is left to interpretation based upon perspective. However, most of the hard sciences aren't dependant upon interpretation, genetic studies being one of them.

I get the feeling you don't know much about the scientific method and how the peer review process works. When a scientist conducts an experiment to prove a theorem, other scientists try to reproduce the results. These processes ensure that conclusions aren't just the result of expectations.

You'll have to come up with a better example of the "taint" you go on and on about. Archeology is more of a humanity study than a science... if you want to talk about scientific archeology, it's best to call it Archaeometry



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
I think there is absolutely zero possibility that Zana was an African, or a human for that matter. This is of course ONLY if what has been reported of the case is actually accurate. If the descriptions of her features and characteristics, as well as her behavior truly are accurate, then the only viable explanation in my opinion is that she was a sasquatch. I was thoroughly convinced of the existence of these animals after my sighting, although I was leaning toward existence before my sighting, therefore I am focused solely on finding explanations for various aspects of their existence.

There are actually other stories from around the same time period, some even earlier, which are great encounter stories. Part of the problem with them however is precisely due to their age. Methods of reporting at the time were not as advanced as today, and coupled with investigative differences and technological deficiencies, it is to be expected that lots of false information would not be filtered from these reports. Some may have even been made up. The Zana case, however, I believe to be real. How much of it is real I do not know. But "something" did happen. There was someone or something named Zana, that was different from the humans of the region. Concluding that she was a sasquatch is not that much of a leap once a person sees one for themselves, and then compares what they saw with descriptions of Zana.



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   

peter vlar
reply to post by cathar
 


I'm not attacking the messenger, I'm attacking the legitimacy of their work. Fact- Sitchin completely fabricated information for his book. Fact, Sami has made a mess of any potential real archaeological work in Bosnia by using 19th century excavation techniques and actually destroying things. They are hacks plain and simple. I will however attack Childress directly since you posted the video. He has changed his stance and story so many times that he can't keep it straight. He's a profiteer selling books to the gullible. In the 80's it was all about Mu, Lemuria and Atlantis. He thought aliens had nothing to do with it at all. By the early 90's( I blame the X-Files) he was on the aliens bandwagon. by the early 2000's he denied aliens entirely again and by 2005 he was back on them as the origin for the Olmecs and head binding. He took the bulk of his info from Danikien and Sitchin, both of whom are frauds. He's a college drop out with no degree and no validity to be making the claims he does. Curiosity only gets you so far if you have no clue what you're interpreting. I used to be really into these books when I was a kid but sometimes you've got to put aside the incredulous saucer eyes and look at the evidence and see where it leads. He doesn't do that. He as well as many others, begins with a presupposition and works tangential evidence around it to weave a web of authenticity to those who don't know any better. Buy the books if you enjoy them, but there's no reality in them. I wish there was but it just isn't so.


Careful Pete, college has nothing to do with it. Many of the greatest minds and talents in every direction did not go to college. Doing so does not mean your smart or right. Know many that are blubbering idiots. Some of the best were self taught, especially old school archeology. By historical definition it was an aristocratic affair of rich folk, mainly from England trying to make names for themselves and have fancy collections to show off.

Few of the most successful in the world either did not go to college or dropped out.

You are also quick to judge folks that have made genuine contributions, more so than you i think.

Back up a bit and try not to be so judging, does not become you.

In some places there is no choice but to get in with the bulldozer, progress does not stop for archeology quite often and you do the best you can.

The Bot



posted on Nov, 7 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by dlbott
 


I appreciate the caution you urge and concur that hasty judgments are rather unnecessary. I can also see why you would jump to these conclusions based on a scant few message board blurbs I've posted. However, I did not reach my conclusions based on wikipedia entries or an anti ancient aliens site. See, I used to be really into all of these ideas and consequently still keep an open mind. My opinions of Sitchin, von Daniken and Childress arr based on 2 decades of due diligence and checking and rechecking which I's were dotted, T's were crossed and why. I stand firmly behind my opinions of those 3 in particular as charlatans and profiteers. You know why Georgio Tsoukalakis is a huge face behind the ancient aliens show? His background is in communications, not science. His job is to sell the stories with enough plausibility to keep ratings moving and hence keep the show on the air. The motivation is pure profit.None of these people have made, as you say, genuine contributions to anything other than their bank accounts.

There is a lot about our past we don't know and walking in with a preconceived notion, whether by the "professional" scientist or the amateur, is going to mean your end result is going to be very questionable and whatever real evidence or data you acquire will be disputed ad infinitum.

The difference between the scientist and the amateur though is that in science if we want credit for something it must be published and peer reviewed. This is done by people who's sole purpose in life is to find errors in your work. It's one reason why you have to defend your dissertation, so that you get a taste of the lions den you'll be walking into for the rest of your career. As for your quip regarding the necessity of using a bulldozer for an archaeological dig... hell no! there is NO reason at all in this day and age why anyone who knows how to preserve a site would use construction equipment in a way that has been used at the Bosnian Pyramids. In their quest to prove its a man made structure they are destroying some very real archaeological evidence as the site has been inhabited and used by various groups because of its strategic location for millennia. It almost seems like you're making excuses for shoddy work because they're just good guys doing the best they can. It's a farce. I appreciate your comments, I just completely disagree, particualrly with the 3 I've discussed here. thanks again.
edit on 7-11-2013 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2013 @ 08:14 AM
link   

cathar
@ Lazernation.....Let me put you straight...Zena was an Alma...Alma's are what the Russian's call their version of Bigfoot.....or Sasquatch........
If you read down to the 13 paragraph is says that Zena had Negroid & Mongoloid facial features.....
Zena's human/Alma hybrid children also had Negroid /Mongoloid facial features....Black Africans do not have thick hair growing all over their body and face...the TV show you saw was BS because they didn't want to reveal the awful truth....

bigfootology.com...

Have you ever wondered why ,even though a Bigfoot was shot & displayed in a cake of ice back in the 1950s nobody ever was allowed to examine it without the ice.....?...It is politically incorrect because the awful embaressing truth is the Blacks are closely related to the Bigfoot species....
Googly bigfoot/human hybrid/zena and you will get plenty of info on this..I talked to Lloyd Pye privately about 15 years ago & he confirmed this to me and he wrote as much in his book..Every thing you Know Is Wrong....
edit on 4-11-2013 by cathar because: (no reason given)





posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   

This is a fellow that used to live in Algeria and for a while was being pushed as "The Missing link", in reality is probably derived from that very old native-African strain in the news lately. In other words, Zana the Wild woman could be related to this guy. source : Dale Drinnon "Frontiers of Zoology" Blog and facebook



From Youtube below (more on there also, I just put a bit.)

"Bassou lives in the Valley of Dades, near the town of Skoura, in Morocco. He sleeps in the trees there and subsists on dates, berries, and insects. He wears no clothes (although he was persuaded to don a burlap sack for the photograph which appears here), uses no tools, and speaks only in grunts.

The local Berbers have been aware of Bassou's presence for at least the past 25 years, but they shun him in superstitious fear and have been unable to give any clue as to his origin. Western scientists have also been aware of Bassou for a number of years, but, for the most part, they too shun him in superstitious fear. For Bassou's existence raises some very troubling questions for the true believers in the TV religion of universal human equality. It has been hard enough for them to try to fit Blacks and Whites together into that scheme, without having to worry about Bassou.

What is Bassou? No one really knows. He displays both ape-like and manlike characteristics. Those who have studied him, however, have been reluctant to accept the suggestion that he is the product of a mating between a human being -- Negro or Berber -- and an anthropoid ape, all three of which Morocco has an abundance."






edit on 12-11-2013 by RUFFREADY because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   

cathar

cathar
@ Lazernation.....Let me put you straight...Zena was an Alma...Alma's are what the Russian's call their version of Bigfoot.....or Sasquatch........
If you read down to the 13 paragraph is says that Zena had Negroid & Mongoloid facial features.....
Zena's human/Alma hybrid children also had Negroid /Mongoloid facial features....Black Africans do not have thick hair growing all over their body and face...the TV show you saw was BS because they didn't want to reveal the awful truth....

bigfootology.com...

Have you ever wondered why ,even though a Bigfoot was shot & displayed in a cake of ice back in the 1950s nobody ever was allowed to examine it without the ice.....?...It is politically incorrect because the awful embaressing truth is the Blacks are closely related to the Bigfoot species....
Googly bigfoot/human hybrid/zena and you will get plenty of info on this..I talked to Lloyd Pye privately about 15 years ago & he confirmed this to me and he wrote as much in his book..Every thing you Know Is Wrong....
edit on 4-11-2013 by cathar because: (no reason given)




Very, very sad. The one thing that seems apparent is that Zana was a human being with feelings. I hope she is at piece.

I think I can help explain some of the contradictions here. When they are saying that she is "100% Sub-Saharan Africa," they seem to be telling a bit of a fib, because earlier, they said they measured her mTDNA (maternal line). This is actually a tiny, part of he overall DNA picture. All it means is that her mother, her mother's mother, her mother mother's mother's etc. were sub-Saharan. When you go even a few generations back, you end up with tens of thousands of ancestors, and just measuring this line absolutely dos not give you anything like a real picture.

This would account for the fact that, as others have said, she had Mongolid features. I have no theory on what caused the odd, archaic human features. They said she only had about 2.5% Neanderthal, but what about Denisovan? I do not believe that relic Denisovans survive, but we know that their genes survive in Austrailans, who are about 6% Denisovan in addition to their Neanderthal. Denisovans are originally from the Eurasian landmass, so is it possible there are aboriginals there that have high percentages of Denisovan? Such a thing would not be at all beyond the pale given what we know about human ancestry these days.

Or, even less exotic, what about Gigantism? It was said that she had great size and strength. What if she just looked a lot like Andre the Giant?

Again, I think the one thing that is very apparent here is that she was a human being. How sad what happened to her.



posted on Nov, 22 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by cachibatches
 

A very interesting clip.

I'd go with the ancient (prehistoric) sub-Saharan wave of migration theory.

Actually, this links up with some recent evidence that a race of people with brow-ridges - who were likely dark skinned and lived as hunter-gatherers - also existed in the Americas.
This has been documented from sites in Brazil, according to a BBC documentary titled Ancient Voices.

The descriptions of the documentary draw heavily on physical similarities between the ancient Brazilian skulls and Australian Aborigine skulls, although the documentary also mentions possible sub-Saharan African "negroid" connections.

I suppose this means it's uncertain whether these people actually came to America from Australia, or whether both the Australians and Brazilians had a common ancestor that originated in sub-Saharan Africa. We all apparently descended from Africa in any case, although this group seemingly deviated little from their tropical adaptions, or core features.
ipoaa.com...

It appears very likely that there was a widespread ancient race of humans with brow ridges, who once reached into South America (as late as 50 000 years ago), but who eventually became mixed with later waves of migrants, or were driven to extinction.

A tantalizing theory is that they reached South America from Australia or Oceania by boat, but another theory is that they came from Russia across a land-bridge, similar to how the Native Americans would later arrive in the continents.

If the latter theory is true, then they must have lived in parts of Russia and Asia before spreading to the Americas.

There are obvious descendants of early African migrations that survived in isolated places (even after the devastation of colonialism), such as the various "negrito" tribes and the Andaman Islanders.
They might not all have significant brow ridges or come from the same group in Africa (the Andaman Islanders at least appear close to modern pygmy tribes), but it does show that there were survivors from African migrations that must have occurred thousands of years ago.
That is to say, the populations we find in much of the world in historic times may have been preceded by earlier migrations out of Africa.

Few peoples remained with brow-ridges of note, but one theory regards the Fuegean people of South America as a mixture between mongolian-type people (modern Native Americans) and aboriginal-type people, since many of them apparently had brow-ridges before their near extinction.

Their lifestyle and culture was regarded as surprisingly "primitive" for the harsh environment, to which they seemed uniquely adapted, until they were hunted by colonial sheep farmers. The survivors lived in mission stations, where imported diseases killed all but a handful of survivors.

One could imagine that such peoples could have survived in vast wilderness areas (such as parts of Russia) relatively unnoticed, and somewhat adapted to local conditions over thousands of years.

The Fuegeans lived, hunted and swam naked in the virtually Antarctic waters off Terra del Fuego, although if they were related to an ancient aboriginal population they were already physically and culturally mixed.
Nevertheless, their survival in such climatic extremes without clothes in their daily activities (except for rubbing their bodies with fish oil), or any kind of shelter apart from simple huts, remains astounding.

I'd like to see the Zana skull compared to those of ancient Brazilians, like the Lucia skull.

If the evidence exists for an early population that came from sub-Saharan Africa and once moved north to populate parts of Eurasia, the Pacific and the Americas, that would be astounding enough.

To consider that some of them survived into the 19th and 20th century (and perhaps into our century) with a primitive, but highly adapted lifestyle, that would be beyond amazing.
I think the connections would be definitely be worth exploring.


edit on 22-11-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join