Archaeologica.org

Another possibility, although remote, is some kind of contamination. It is my understanding that 70 mummies tested posiive and all were located in Munich. To date, no independent confirmations have been seen or did I miss something?

This contention was one of the first to be voiced. It is now an established fact that the cocaine was ingested during the persons lifetime, or as your paper from Maat notes - ante motem. No amount of post mortem contamination can cause the presence of the drug in hair and teeth.

In the hair and teeth, I agree (to a point). On the hair and teeth is a different matter. Yesterday I heard a statistic that 80% of US paper money is contaminated with cocaine residue. Mainly from the fact that in its refined form it is a very, very fine powder that can easily penetrate paper or cloth fibers, mechanisms, etc. and modern detection methods are extremely sensitive, capable of detecting one part in mulitple millions.

In the mummy case, if there were contamination it is likely the modern, refined variety.

The most plausible explanation seems to be a local plant or perhaps, one traded from another locale in the middle east or asia, which contains cocaine or cocaine like substances.

One question.
What made them look for drugs in the first place? Or did it come out in other tests?

What made them look for drugs in the first place? Or did it come out in other tests?

The whole thing started when a small piece of tobacco was found in the wrappings of Ramses mummy. Not a tobacco like substance, but tobacco.

This ultimately led to all the further tests. The actual piece of tobacco has never been recognized as anything but contamination from a pipe smoker, despite the evidence. But nobody can deny the hair and teeth evidence.

This story was in a link I posted on p. 1 I think. In the end, Monk, one has to choose between two very implausible possibilities. Or the third option, which is to ignore it.

For myself, this alone is not enough to make the case for trans-oceanic contact. But there is other evidence - and it should all be taken as a whole.

Beagle wrote:
actual piece of tobacco has never been recognized as anything but contamination from a pipe smoker

A pipe smoker in 1212 BC – one of the embalmers, or a rituals performing priest – or a pipe smoker since its discovery in KV7 in 1881 AD?

Maybe pharaoh died from second-hand smoke.

Forum Monk wrote:Maybe pharaoh died from second-hand smoke.

If he did, he made it into his 80's.

Bad thing, smoking. I used to but wised up and quit.

http://news.sawf.org/Lifestyle/39787.aspx

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Abora III and its mostly German, 12-strong crew cast their fates to the winds when they set off on Wednesday from New York on a six to nine-week voyage to the distant shores of southern Spain.

The team is led by Dominique Goerlitz, a botanist and experimental archeologist, who first became fascinated more than a decade ago with pre-historic cave drawings of reed boats, some of which dated back 15,000 years.

His mission is to prove the experts wrong, by overturning current thinking that thanks to the prevailing winds and currents Stone Age man would have been capable of sailing towards America, but not back again.

Regarding the subject of ancient trans-Atlantic trade, these guys are out to prove it was possible.

Oh Lord! Are two steps more than these people are capable of. Why in Hell's name are they supposed not to have been able to get back again?
And as for being invisible to tanker's radar, somebody send them a dusbin lid!

I guess because the current opposed them, Dig.

It wouldn't Beag. Once having reached America the current out of the Gulf would automatically bring them back to Europe.

Digit wrote:It wouldn't Beag. Once having reached America the current out of the Gulf would automatically bring them back to Europe.

Yup, a big ol' conveyor belt:

I went back and checked the article again, and it says the arctic winds are the problem. I dunno.

I can't imagine why they want to go against the wind, what the hell are trying to prove?
Till fairly recently European ships could not tack, hence the Viking ships used oars, so okay, you can row the Atlantic, but sailors whose ship couldn't tack are more likely to have studied winds and currents I think.
Perhaps they were masochists.

Beagle wrote:I went back and checked the article again, and it says the arctic winds are the problem. I dunno.

Arctic winds, and they're trying to recreate a scene from 15,000 B.P. ? They're retracing a path that was ice, if I'm understanding this correctly

Monk and R/S, will you break out your Paleo sea-level simulations again?

If they can't think of a suitable radar reflector or transponder they can't be very bright either.
I hope their life policies are paid up.