Homo Erectus/Neanderthal in North America?

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 6:37 am

Thank you Marduk for your "opinion".

I'm still curious about your opinion Doug. Really.

Leona Conner · Post by **Leona Conner** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 9:03 am

[quote]they aren't representative of Olmecs
because the Olmecs didn't make them [/quote]

If, on your opinion, the Olmecs did not make them, please give us your idea of who did.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 9:46 am

nobody knows who the olmec heads represent, but it is known that they didn't represent the olmecs
It was the olmecs who defaced and buried many of them in a ritual act of destruction
so whoever they were its more likely that they represent a race that preceeded the olmec and who were annihilated by them

they are called Olmec heads by association with the only known group who inhabited the area
these following carvings are known to represent the Olmec racial stereotype

none of them look african do they
if you want to find the real truth about the olmec heads don't look at the faces
look at the helmets

and then do a little research to see what other race was known to wear helmets like that because in that period there was only one group on earth that actually wore helmets of any kind
and no
they weren't black, egyptian or chinese

FreeThinker · Post by **FreeThinker** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:35 am

"It was the olmecs who defaced and buried many of them in a ritual act of destruction so whoever they were its more likely that they represent a race that preceeded the olmec and who were annihilated by them "

I think it far more likely that the defacement of the stone heads was the result of political upheaval within the Olmec society than a racial war. Similar destruction of monumental statues, for example, happened on Rapa Nui (Easter Island) in a time of political strife.

****** TOTALLY OFF SUBJECT REMARK *******

What is up with "I before E except after C."....except in words like: science, ancient, society, etc. What good is a rule like that? Anybody have any more words whose spelling balks that dumb rule? Man, I wish we had a phonetic alphabet....

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:44 am

its a nice explanation
but none of the statues attributed to the actual Olmecs look like the heads
many of them have beards and look asian

looking asian doesnt mean that they came from china either
asia is the ancient homeland of every group in america pre columbus

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 3:18 pm

http://community-2.webtv.net/PABarton/H ... page4.html

Thanks - but I was asking Doug for his opinion on the stone faces that are obviously African. The bearded, semitic carved faces are very interesting too.

Again, I don't endorse this website, but it has the pictures I'm talking about.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 pm

Thanks - but I was asking Doug for his opinion

well i was talking to Leona
i didn't realise this was your private forum
do you have a license of ownership i can look at ?

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 5:14 pm

DougWeller wrote:
Minimalist wrote:
A lot of stuff in archaeology is unprovable but accepted as probable,

And, I actually have a problem with that. But it comes down to 'who' is deciding the probabilities.
No, it comes down to the evidence first.

One man's 'evidence' is another man's 'unproven' or 'wild' speculation.
Like I said, it all comes down to 'who' is deciding.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 5:25 pm

It was the olmecs who defaced and buried many of them in a ritual act of destruction

Most of the ones I've seen do not look terribly 'defaced' and it seems like a hell of a lot of work to dig a big enough hole and bury them as a ritual act of destruction.

When the Taliban wanted to destroy the statues of Buddha they used dynamite. Far more effective and a hell of a lot simpler. Even without dynamite, I suspect they could have saved themselves a lot of effort by just smashing them with other rocks.

grunabona246 · Post by **grunabona246** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:11 am

freethinker,

i am interested in your opinion as to the possibility of interbreeding between neanderthals and homo sapiens. i am aware of some genetic testing that seems to indicate no interbreeding, but common sense tells me there likely was interbreeding. also, the population range of neanderthals and the population range of caucasians in, say, 1500 a. d. seems much the same.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:47 am

Gruna, Freethinker doesn't post every day, but he'll see your post.

In the meantime, you might check the posts by Daybrown. You can just click on her name (Noahs Flood for one) and then you'll see her profile and can click to view). She has a lot of feminist issues but I share many of her thoughts about Neandertal.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:12 am

common sense tells me there likely was interbreeding

Its not common sense that makes a homo sapiens wanna breed with a neanderthal chick
its extreme desperation

grunabona246 · Post by **grunabona246** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:23 am

Beagle wrote:Gruna, Freethinker doesn't post every day, but he'll see your post.

In the meantime, you might check the posts by Daybrown. You can just click on her name (Noahs Flood for one) and then you'll see her profile and can click to view). She has a lot of feminist issues but I share many of her thoughts about Neandertal.

beagle,

i was going to say i'm interested in your ideas also, but someone im'd me and i wanted to talk to her so couldn't get back here until now. i appreciated your invitation to join everyone. i'll check daybrown's posts also.

let me know your thoughts about the population ranges. i suspect many caucasians have neanderthal genes. i've been called a neanderthal before, and i wasn't insulted, so maybe there was a reason.

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:53 am

****** TOTALLY OFF SUBJECT REMARK *******

What is up with "I before E except after C."....except in words like: science, ancient, society, etc. What good is a rule like that? Anybody have any more words whose spelling balks that dumb rule? Man, I wish we had a phonetic alphabet....

Stupid rule.

grunabona246 · Post by **grunabona246** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:49 pm

marduk wrote:
common sense tells me there likely was interbreeding
Its not common sense that makes a homo sapiens wanna breed with a neanderthal chick
its extreme desperation

marduk,

did it never occur to you that the neanderthal chick might have had to be pretty desperate to be interested in your average homo sapiens male of the time?