Native American creation myths

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:47 am

Amazingly though, there are basic common themes that seem to have been present all over the globe.

Bruce · Post by **Bruce** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:43 am

Try crystalinks grand canyon egyptian connection. not a lot of creation theorie, but i think puts "native americans" into perspective. homo sapiens may have come out of africa but there is so much more that is missing. neandertals may have been the first "native americans".

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:47 am

Bruce wrote:Try crystalinks grand canyon egyptian connection. not a lot of creation theorie, but i think puts "native americans" into perspective. homo sapiens may have come out of africa but there is so much more that is missing. neandertals may have been the first "native americans".

You got a link to that?

Leona Conner · Post by **Leona Conner** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:35 am

I would like to hear what they were like originally. Way back many generations ago, before the influence of the missionaries.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 11:06 am

Using Bruce's comment as a search string, I found this on Google.

http://www.crystalinks.com/gc_egyptconnection.html

Bruce, I assume this is what you meant?

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 11:59 am

I've read that before. It turned out to be a hoax, didn't it?

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:09 pm

Then why is that part of the park closed off?

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:18 pm

Minimalist wrote:Then why is that part of the park closed off?

It's one of them conspiracys. A good hoax always says something like, "and no one was ever allowed in that area again". Damn, I hate being the voice of reason! I ain't ever been the resident sceptic, before, but some of this stuff is just too freakin' weird. What is this world coming to when I'm the sane one?

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:07 pm

Towards the end of that article it mentions that they may have seen Indian burials which would have mummified naturally in the dry air and mistook them for Egyptian mummies. Egypt was 'in fashion' in the early 20th century.

Leona Conner · Post by **Leona Conner** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:49 pm

Read that one before. Didn't believe it then and still don't. Hell even I'm not that gullible, I don't think, or is it I think or is it maybe I think (sorry, forgot Arch is the non-thinker here.)

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:08 pm

This reminds me of "the case of the cocaine mummies"

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:14 pm

Sherlock Holmes?

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:20 pm

No, that was a real show on Discovery. Traces of cocaine had been found in Egyptian mummies. It was a pretty good show.

Bruce · Post by **Bruce** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:03 am

i think there was some plant or something also found that should'nt have been in egypt at that time. the smithsonian has a very good track record of determining what they think should be recorded or not. has anybody been to this alleged site in the grand canyon?

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 9:48 am

From The Straight Dope, a site similar to the Urban Legends Reference Page which checks out these stories.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/010126.html

The TV show wasn't a bad piece of work. (You can read the script at www.uiowa.edu/~anthro/webcourse/lost/coctrans.htm.) It gave ample airtime to the skeptics but overall left the impression that Balabanova, Parsche, et al. might be on to something, making a better case for their work than they had bothered to make themselves.

But it was just TV. It's not the kind of thing scientists normally respond to, and they haven't.

There the matter rests. According to Emily Teeter, an Egyptologist at the University of Chicago's Oriental Institute, the Germans' work has been dismissed by mainstream archaeologists. No discussion of it is to be found in recent surveys of the field. Theories about transoceanic trade in ancient times are considered too outré to warrant serious consideration. To defenders of Balabanova, Parsche, and company, this suggests a pigheaded refusal to reexamine entrenched beliefs. I disagree. If the Germans aren't being taken seriously, it's largely their own fault

I don't know if it is true or not but we have all see that same reaction from "mainstream" archaeologists on anything which does not fit their current theories.