America Unearthed were the Maya in Georgia ?

Originally posted by Sphota
Cahokia? Wikipedia

They were a mound building civilization on the Mississippi, wouldn't be a stretch that they were in Georgia. Unfortunately, because most American Pré-Colombian civilizations had no written records or permanent structures, so it's hard to know where specific civilizations started out before reaching their "final destinations" upon European arrival.

We know, for example, that the Mexica (the Aztecs) had mythology of their people coming from the North before settling in the Central Valley of Mexico. We can infer some basis of truth to this as the majority of languages related to Nahuatl, the language of the Aztecs, exist in Northern Mexico, Arizona and Utah.

We also know that not long before the arrival of the Spanish to the Southwest, the Navajo had arrived from Alaska and Yukon Territory.

What we don't know is how long it took them to get there and what fomented the move.

It wouldn't surprise me if a sophisticated civilization started on the Mississippi and died out due to some cataclysm. Maybe the arrival of the Vikings started the true spread of Eurasian disease epidemics and Columbus and friends gave a final blow.

I'd like to ask you in a serious manner because I honestly don't know, but is there any evidence of Native Americans coming from the north presented by historians rather than it must be so because of the land bridge that once was between Siberia and Alaska? I know I was taught this in school but I can't remember if there was anything more it was based on. We were taught that civilization began in Africa so there must have been a land bridge that Native Americans migrated across, but I never really believed that.

I have my own theory that civilization in the western hemisphere began in the southern Mexico region and moved north. Only because it seems that the Indian societies down there were much more advanced than those from the north, meaning they had more time to develop. Just a theory anyways.

If you look at all the Indigenous cultures of the Americas, the Mesoamerican and Andes cultures were far more advanced. This includes the Aztes, Mayans and Incas. They used aquaculture and agriculture, they built urban societies, many of which were permanent settlements. Some of these societies even had written records and built monuments. Cultures across North America didn't build permanent settlements, farm, have irrigation systems or have written records. They passed on their history orally through legends. The farther north you go from the Central America region, the lesser advanced the civilizations became. Wouldn't it be the other way around if the Native Americans migrated from the land bridge rather than from the south.

How civilization in the western hemisphere began in the middle of the continents is beyond me. I'm just throwing out my ideas on it. If I was an Ancient Alien theorist, I would suggest they caught a ride.

The Etowah Indian mounds are very cool and a very serene place. The potential Mayan connection or offshoot has been there for decades, throughout Georgia, Tennessee, and other parts of the southeast. Why is it so hard to believe that tribes were migratory and may have intermingled cultural objects or beliefs? What's the big deal here?

As for this dude making a huge deal about not being allowed on the property, for what is most likely a very explainable reason like that it is private property or a protected area, that seems like drama to me for what they think will make good TV.

lostworlds.org...

Originally posted by randyvs

Originally posted by Bilk22
You can watch the full episode here.

Right on Bilk I knew some one would have my back.

edit on 22-12-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

First Off tons of thanks - your post made my day, week, month and Year!!!! Star every post but only 1 Flag sorry to say!

This link states video not available! Found it on a site which I cannot talk about due to TnC!

Anyone want a copy I have it in my public DropBox U2U me for a link!

Our US History books need to change after all "Honest Abe" documented a find of a giant skeleton found. Jim Vieira has documented so many amazing things missing from our history lessons and the Smithsonian Ins. is burying deeper than the hundreds years of dirt that the people who made these discoveries had to dig to find them!!! I used to donate to Smiths - never again!

Thanks Randy You are a STAR!!!!!!!

reply to post by Picollo30


kat.ph has it, 3 torrents, with a total of just 4 seeders.

Originally posted by randyvs
I did do a search, found nadda .
Is evidence of a Mayan Site in Georgia being suppressed by the academic community? Scott Walter is our host in this exciting new series on the History channel. I'm watching it now and it has my attention enough to post . Spiral mounds are just the beginning of what looks to be a very informative series, about everything in America's own back yard

I know some ATS Slaya's I mean playa's that should be stoked. Check this puppy out coming out on the twenty first indeed. Very cool.

Slayerrrrrr!

What do you all think of this first show ?

I really enjoyed this show. Forensic geologist Scott Wolter (Kensington Runes) makes a convincing case for the Georgia - Maya connection. You can bet I'll be tuning in to this series.

I have NO problem believing that Establishment academia has been ignoring & suppressing the evidence.

reply to post by AuranVector


Being from the region man, I have been able to get in contact with some people who really know they're #. There is a MAJOR connection, and its hidden for the same reasons as usual..

TPTB cant be re-writing the history books, if the masses aren't questioning this then they dont have to address it, simple. I love the idea of this series though, hopefully it will bring about some awareness.

The idea that NA is the only continent that doesn't have pyramids is proposterous.. we have PLENTY. More than most other countries yet the best ones are reduced to being called "mounds" and "mound complex's".

There is a major conspiracy here, unfortunately there is not enough interest from the general public about it to get it the notice it really deserves. Its a shame..maybe one day people will see that our future is our past repeating itself and actually care about history. Until they get off the smartphones though I don't see it happening..

reply to post by Rezlooper

If you look at all the Indigenous cultures of the Americas, the Mesoamerican and Andes cultures were far more advanced. This includes the Aztes, Mayans and Incas. They used aquaculture and agriculture, they built urban societies, many of which were permanent settlements. Some of these societies even had written records and built monuments. Cultures across North America didn't build permanent settlements, farm, have irrigation systems or have written records. They passed on their history orally through legends. The farther north you go from the Central America region, the lesser advanced the civilizations became. Wouldn't it be the other way around if the Native Americans migrated from the land bridge rather than from the south.

There are several ways to explain that without aliens.
First the so called "Clovis comet" impact 13000 years ago severely depressed populations in central and eastern north America.
Eastern and central north America were devastated and the survivors fled south and west, with Clovis showing up in central Mexico by 9000 years ago. These people were one of the foundations of mesoamerican culture.


Secondly north America has no native plants that lend themselves to domestication.
Central and south America have many plants that were suitable for agriculture, beans, squashes,tomatoes, sweet potatoes, jicama, corn and quinoa.
And the reason you see the large empire in south America is because of draft animals, the llama, alpaca and such.
There were no species suitable to domestication in either north or central America. That's why mayan culture was not a true empire, but a collection of independent city states that had an ever shifting alliances and associations. Without draft animals an army can only travel as far as the food and water a man can carry will last . That's about 3 days or about 60 miles, which is about the size of political influence of any given mayan citystate.

reply to post by punkinworks10


I made a triangles for #'s and giggles from Ocmulgge (GA) to Kolomoki (GA) to Letchworth (FL). Directly in the center is a place called the Chickasawhatchee Swamp. It encompasses 300+ square miles and is now a state owned wildlife reserve.

Here is the thing about the Chickasawhatcheee Swamp and my county in general, the diversity of wildlife here is 2nd only to the rainforests of South America and MUCH more hospitable to humans. To you and I or anyone, that swamp can be very intimidating.. to ancient Native Americans though it didn't get any better.

reply to post by ressiv


Sure there were pyramids in North America. Cahokia is an example where some earthen pyramids were constructed:

Cahokia

There are other such places in North America as well.

reply to post by punkinworks10


Thanks for the history lesson, that's why I asked. Not sure if I'm buying it though. There is another thread trending right now about the Mayan connection to Chinese and Indians through games, or possible connection I should say, that if true would require a different explanation.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Rezlooper
reply to post by punkinworks10

 

Thanks for the history lesson, that's why I asked. Not sure if I'm buying it though. There is another thread trending right now about the Mayan connection to Chinese and Indians through games, or possible connection I should say, that if true would require a different explanation.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 23-12-2012 by Rezlooper because: (no reason given)

I was strictly speaking of why there is a differential rate in the development of native American cultures. It's simply because north America didn't have the population density needed to achieve communal projects, until they adopted agriculture, which consisted of plants from central America, hence the basis for a connection to the people of central America, ie the Maya or olmecs, toltecs or mixtecs.
What I was talking about has nothing to do with any possible cultural connections to Asia, of which there are plenty that go back tens of thousands of years.
It takes agriculture to feed the number of people needed to take on large community building projects.
And those sorts of things show up along the misssippi and its tributaries at the same time agriculture shows up.

"The Mayan are one of the Mexican Native American ethnic groups that became the Creek Indians" Holy crap! I may be married to a Mayan! Can't wait to tell her in the morning....and her mom on Christmas day

Originally posted by JrSkeptic
Great what-if or alternate history story.

An archeologist who dug at Saltville, an old friend of mine, would have needed much more evidence. Artifacts and such.

I'd ask her directly about this but she passed away last year from cancer at 83. I had a chance to interview her. One of only a handful of Native American Indian archeologist.

I do believe the Mayan were seafarers, explorers to some extent, they populated numerous islands along the coast line.

Sorry to hear about your friend.

as a point of interest to you, perhaps, my alma mater, the University of Arizona, has one of the best and oldest archaeology depts on Amerindian matters, notably regarding Southwestern peoples for obvious reasons. Great place to do some digging - pun intended.

but also taken literally, as there are many dig sites in that region, from Casa Grande to Tucson proper and up to the Cliff Dwellings off I-17... The whole state might as well be an open air museum for archaeology, geology and paleontology. I enjoyed all the places I went and all the things I learned.

reply to post by Rezlooper


Well, I suppose the best argument that maintains the land/ice bridge theories (the pré-Clovis Bering and the one with Europe that would have been ice, not land) and still allows for Mesoamerican cultural genesis is that the environment of that region accommodates human life more readily. So, in Montana your whole, but short, summer would be spent on hunting, fishing and foraging so that enough food could be stored for the winters, which are harsh.

However, Central America does not have such drastic variability from season to season. There might be wet and dry periods, and naturally such things might effect crop growth. Nevertheless, the actual abundance of food that can be hunted or foraged would have been relatively constant:

-all the fruits/plants that we take for granted that ONLY grew wild back then in the Central American and Caribbean coastal areas, like tomatoes, avocado, chili/bell peppers, cacao/chocolate, cashews, soursop/custard apple, carambola/star fruit, jackfruit, mangoes, malanga, manioc/yuca, corn, beans of several types, squashes/melons, etc.

-abundant animals and fisheries all year.

So, when you don't have to work as hard for food, you can do more contemplating and tinkering, which eventually lead to "civilization". I feel that sea voyages were much later and itinerant, if anything, but you never know...more research may show that that type of travel was feasible and happened earlier on than once thought.

reply to post by punkinworks10

I agree for the most part.

The only part of what you said that I disagree with is that North America doesn't have plants that are suitable candidates for agriculture.

I could easily see dandelions, various docks, rhubarb, lambs quarters, camas, canaigre, plantain, several wild pole beans, nettles, Osage orange, maypop/passion fruit, blueberries, raspberries, blackberries, Saguaro, juniper, coco plum, sea grape, and probably a bunch more i can't think of now or don't know personally that are native to the US and Canada.

Why it didnt happen here in North America is because of the winters. It doesnt allow the people time to play around and experiment.

Like you said, the agriculture came up from Mexico. The reason that it took so long was geography, too, because unlike Eurasia, where a Mediterranean/Sub-tropical/temperate climate chain, suitable to the agriculture developed in the Fertile Crescent stretches from Portugal and Morocco to Iran and India without drastic changes needed to take place to create a seed that can thrive under new environmental circumstances.

North America is a lot of climate gradients (USDA: 9+ zones) for those Mexican plants to develop from a tropical clime to, say New York, though it had happened by first contact!

reply to post by LostWorldsORG


I'd like to take a moment from my Christmas freak to thank all who've posted here in my pop- surprise lil thread.
An extra nod to Lost Worlds for his input and a reminder not to let our fellow members go unchecked my good man. When ever you have time of course and how ever much time you take is up to you. I know all the crazy stuff is possibly off the charts for now, with the holidays. Just a heads up not forget them and their pertinent questions.

Thanks again LW.O.

reply to post by Sphota


I once read a paper by a paeleobotonist, and he charcterized north America as the land of berries and ferns, those two groups being the most diversified in north America.

Of your examples,plantains, rhubarb, passionfruit are not native to north America.
Osage Orange is not edible, but does make good bows evidently.
Juniper berries don't have much caloric value, but were used by some tribes as an appetite supressant and a female contraceptive, although some species were used as a foodstuff by some tribes.
Although suguaro is native, its range is so limited and growth so slow it isn't suitable for cultivation.
Other than nuts which some tribes did utilize in a decidedly horticultural way, there are no plants suitable for a staple food crop.

reply to post by Sphota


The geography of the new world does have a lot to do with the difference in development rates, but one thing that is overlooked is the original lifestyles of the first people who settled in an area.
The people who were generalist foragers were more likely to be semi sedentary than nomadic hunters who followed the game.
In the old world and Asia you see generalist foragers being the first people to develop,horticulture, animal husbandry then finally true agriculture.
And in areas with a productive biosphere agriculture never took root because there was no need, such as jomon Japan and central California. In Japan agriculture didn't take root till rice showed up even though the jomon practiced fairly advanced horticulture. In central cal the natives practiced horticulture with the oak tree to improve the harvest of acorns, they were so good at it that in some areas oak trees replaced the other species completely.

Originally posted by Sphota
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

Well, I suppose the best argument that maintains the land/ice bridge theories (the pré-Clovis Bering and the one with Europe that would have been ice, not land) and still allows for Mesoamerican cultural genesis is that the environment of that region accommodates human life more readily. So, in Montana your whole, but short, summer would be spent on hunting, fishing and foraging so that enough food could be stored for the winters, which are harsh.

However, Central America does not have such drastic variability from season to season. There might be wet and dry periods, and naturally such things might effect crop growth. Nevertheless, the actual abundance of food that can be hunted or foraged would have been relatively constant:

-all the fruits/plants that we take for granted that ONLY grew wild back then in the Central American and Caribbean coastal areas, like tomatoes, avocado, chili/bell peppers, cacao/chocolate, cashews, soursop/custard apple, carambola/star fruit, jackfruit, mangoes, malanga, manioc/yuca, corn, beans of several types, squashes/melons, etc.

-abundant animals and fisheries all year.

So, when you don't have to work as hard for food, you can do more contemplating and tinkering, which eventually lead to "civilization". I feel that sea voyages were much later and itinerant, if anything, but you never know...more research may show that that type of travel was feasible and happened earlier on than once thought.

When the first people came across the bridge, they continued moving until the climate was more suitable for a civilization to begin. These first peoples must have been Asian then, and brought the games along thousands of years ago, according to that other thread. Interesting.

Originally posted by punkinworks10
reply to post by Sphota

 

I once read a paper by a paeleobotonist, and he charcterized north America as the land of berries and ferns, those two groups being the most diversified in north America.

Of your examples,plantains, rhubarb, passionfruit are not native to north America.
Osage Orange is not edible, but does make good bows evidently.
Juniper berries don't have much caloric value, but were used by some tribes as an appetite supressant and a female contraceptive, although some species were used as a foodstuff by some tribes.
Although suguaro is native, its range is so limited and growth so slow it isn't suitable for cultivation.
Other than nuts which some tribes did utilize in a decidedly horticultural way, there are no plants suitable for a staple food crop.

Ive heard such arguments but still disagree. Many food items we consume are domesticated exactly in order for us to be able to consume them. Many almond trees in the wild are down right poisonous, for example. Corn was nothing like it is today. Brassica ole races is another good example, as broccoli, kale, Brussels sprouts and cauliflower all come from that single species as cultivars.

I apologize about rhubarb, I could have sworn it was native to the US. There are many members within passiflora (passionfruit) and two or three are native to the east and southeast US. The largest is p. incarnata, also known as maypop. Certainly one (possibly two, I haven't been able to clear up if they are different or not) are native to Central and Northern Florida.

When I say plantain, and I had a feeling it wouldn't get understood, so I apologize for not putting a parenthetical, I meant plantago, also goes by plantain. As far as Osage orange, it's not 100% inedible. I view it and many others like the florida pond apple, in the same way I view almonds. If only a certain percentage of fruit are "tasty" to mammals, it would only take some work to focus on reproducing the palatable ones.

Regarding berries, as a botanical meaning, from persimmons to muscadine grapes, there's plenty of native berries that are large and edible.

Oh, totally forgot pawpaw...north American asimina triloba in the anacardiaciaea family, like cashew and mango.

So, I understand where you are coming from, but I just don't think it's valid for academics to totally brush off North American native plants. Not being domesticated is different than not having the potential to be domesticated. Dandelions, once again, are native and varieties in northern latitudes grow very large. In the adirondacks, where my family is from, they grow more than a meter tall and have more foliage than a store bought head of romaine lettuce, collards or Swiss chard. It was just a matter of some tribe with time on their hands to take it and tease out the right genetic qualities.