Page 4 of 17
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:28 pm
by Forum Monk
clubs_stink wrote:That might be evidence of oral cultures mixing far earlier than we can currently comprehend
The truth is in the lore, burried beneath fancy and fiction, but it's there all the same.
Digit wrote:Quite! Club.
Apparently you both agree.
Now when was the cultural mixing supposed to have occurred in your view?
If the Choctow progenitors arrived in North America via Beringia, the latest possible date is believed to be ca. 7000bp, and who knows how long the migration across asia may have taken. This predates the Black Sea flood theory by more than 2000 years. So the common flood must have been another larger and more devastating one which may have actually prompted the migration IMO.
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:39 pm
by clubs_stink
Forum Monk wrote:clubs_stink wrote:That might be evidence of oral cultures mixing far earlier than we can currently comprehend
The truth is in the lore, burried beneath fancy and fiction, but it's there all the same.
Digit wrote:Quite! Club.
Apparently you both agree.
Now when was the cultural mixing supposed to have occurred in your view?
If the Choctow progenitors arrived in North America via Beringia, the latest possible date is believed to be ca. 7000bp, and who knows how long the migration across asia may have taken. This predates the Black Sea flood theory by more than 2000 years. So the common flood must have been another larger and more devastating one which may have actually prompted the migration IMO.
Or, being imaginative I could write a story about a wayward ship/boat blown off course landing in the not so new world...the Ancient Gilligans shipwrecked? Perhaps 10-15 men? They cannot go back..they stay. Man+woman=
they mixed with those people already here, learned their languages...shared their stories?
I am not ready to say Choctaw proginators, I'm still in imagination land...they've been here longer than that....
If I was an investigator of this wild haired theory of mine, that people have been HERE longer than commonly accepted and had contact with other's...perhaps not organized forrays to the "new world" but Ancient Gilligans from ancient lands (what else explains the negroid features on sculptures in SA???)
If I had to investigate it, I'd look for a rendering of what the world looked like before the plates started to move completely way from each other. I know, sounds nuts, but then, once upon a time so did a trip to the moon. What we know as our eastern coastline now would be out..I'd look more to the west or try to surmise where the ancient inland bodies of water laid...and I'd look there.
I have no idea how things might have looked then, I haven't investigated it, I'm just musing WHAT IF..and WHY NOT? Since I am uncontaminated by the ground-in theories taught in right proper schools and no religious leanings color my imagination...I am free to ponder WHAT IF..and WHY NOT about nearly anything without anyone branding me an idiot...heh until I open my big mouth on here
WHY are people locked on to a land bridge...why I ask you WHY? Have they no imagination?
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:40 pm
by marduk
lets approach this from a different direction
how many stories of a man surviving a great flood would you expect to find in a group of men telling stories shortly after a migration that mainly consisted of crossing a great expanse of water
(what else explains the negroid features on sculptures in SA???)
indigenous south american races have those same features
the Fuegians who used to live on the extreme tip of South america are proven to have come from Australia
If I had to investigate it, I'd look for a rendering of what the world looked like before the plates started to move completely way from each other
dude that was about 200 million years ago
WHY are people locked on to a land bridge...why I ask you WHY? Have they no imagination?
the fact that a lot of the North American races claim to have walked there might have something to do with it
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:50 pm
by clubs_stink
marduk wrote:lets approach this from a different direction
how many stories of a man surviving a great flood would you expect to find in a group of men telling stories shortly after a migration that mainly consisted of crossing a great expanse of water
Well...let's surmise that these particular Ancient Gilligans were merely sharing their oral tradition..that they were not contemporaries of the "flood". I've actually seen a fantastic program about the "real noah" and his survival of the flood..my memory is not so good, but I believe it comes from the Epic of Gilgamesh? I hazzard a guess that this was the REAL flood, and the real Noah.
In oral traditions it was very common to "borrow" the tales of other cultures one came into contact with and to embrace, embelish, and mesh the story into a morality tale that would convey a message to the listeners. The Hebrews embraced Gilganoah for the morals of the "story" that could be embroidered into the tale and repeated around the fire at night to instill THEIR religious concepts into the listeners.
This is not just an archeological issues, but rather an issue of oral to written tradition, hence literature.
For instance, the book of Job in the bible was written by at least three people the first transcribed it from the oral, the second added on what was, at the time pressing social issues, and the third added on some more....a morality tale. Isaiah was written by four? (memory) for the same reasons. There is no pat answer to WHY things evolved as they did, but the issue raises it's ugly head in the new testament when the virgin birth was tacked onto the story of Jesus to elevate him to the mystical status of other contemporary "gods". It was sort of a my god can beat your god up thing...
It's a literature issue, and as that German fellow found, sometimes following the clues left in literature deemed works of fancy, can lead to big discoveries. The story of TROY was embelished and worked into a fantastical account with super human participants...enough concrete thinkers wrote it off as just a "novel"...a possibility thinker discovered the long-lost city of Troy.
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:57 pm
by clubs_stink
marduk wrote:lets approach this from a different direction
how many stories of a man surviving a great flood would you expect to find in a group of men telling stories shortly after a migration that mainly consisted of crossing a great expanse of water
(what else explains the negroid features on sculptures in SA???)
indigenous south american races have those same features
the Fuegians who used to live on the extreme tip of South america are proven to have come from Australia
If I had to investigate it, I'd look for a rendering of what the world looked like before the plates started to move completely way from each other
dude that was about 200 million years ago
WHY are people locked on to a land bridge...why I ask you WHY? Have they no imagination?
the fact that a lot of the North American races claim to have walked there might have something to do with it
LOL the indiginous people sort of snapped and changed their story a bit over Kenniwick man
So, how did persons with negroid features get to SA?
(I've travled all over the area in question..yes there are what is considered NOW to be indiginous peoples with negroid features, but all of them came from or with the Spanish. In fact there are whole colonies on the caribean coast of central America of indiginous persons with negroid features, they've been there for hundreds of years, but they got there from shipwrecks ect. and have intermarried to the point of homgenization with the local indians...(by local indians I mean those present PRIOR to the negroid landings.) There are persons deep in the jungles of SA who, as far as we know, hold no links to the spanish but who do have intersting negroid features. How did they get there? Are we to guess that GOD planted two distinct genetic groups into the jungles and said, now here thou canst sprout?
Ok...200 million years ago...AND? So?
Getting locked into a mind frame of impossibility prevents discovery!
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:01 pm
by marduk
but I believe it comes from the Epic of Gilgamesh?
belief is nice but do you have any proof
The Hebrews embraced Gilganoah for the morals of the "story"
Atrahasis was his name
For instance, the book of Job in the bible was written by at least three people the first transcribed it from the oral, the second added on what was, at the time pressing social issues, and the third added on some more....
thats rubbish
there is a babylonian book of job that dates from 1700bce
i.e. before Judaism existed
in places its word for word the same
http://www.piney.com/BabTabuBel.html
a possibility thinker discovered the long-lost city of Troy.
and then preceeded to destroy any evidence by butchering his way through the site and making claims based mainly on a poem and his imagination
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:22 pm
by Minimalist
So, how did persons with negroid features get to SA?
By boat....with no help from the Spanish.
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:28 pm
by marduk
how did persons with negroid features get to SA?
theres no evidence that there were ever any negros in sa before the spanish bought them as slaves
theres been several threads on this already
the consensus is that there are several races that have a wide nose and large lips
one of them is native south american
http://archaeologica.boardbot.com/viewtopic.php?t=805
you've been reading Hancock or possibly Alan Alford havent you
fyi the dna of the olmecs has been typed
it wasn't african
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:38 pm
by clubs_stink
marduk wrote:but I believe it comes from the Epic of Gilgamesh?
belief is nice but do you have any proof
The Hebrews embraced Gilganoah for the morals of the "story"
Atrahasis was his name
For instance, the book of Job in the bible was written by at least three people the first transcribed it from the oral, the second added on what was, at the time pressing social issues, and the third added on some more....
thats rubbish
there is a babylonian book of job that dates from 1700bce
i.e. before Judaism existed
in places its word for word the same
http://www.piney.com/BabTabuBel.html
a possibility thinker discovered the long-lost city of Troy.
and then preceeded to destroy any evidence by butchering his way through the site and making claims based mainly on a poem and his imagination
Sure it did, and "hebrew" writers took the story and added their own take.
From what I recall of my ancient literature class and hermeneutics this internet blurb sounds about right, with the exception of the very last bit which is asserted to have been written by a Job III.
"Scholarly opinion holds that the book of Job was probably written by at least two authors, one who wrote a prose prologue and epilogue that are likely quite old (say from 1000 BC or so), and one who wrote a poetic middle section, perhaps before 600 BC. There were later additions and revision of the poetry, perhaps as late as the 4th century BC. Ezekiel (prophesizing around 580 BC) mentions Job, but we do not know whether Ezekiel meant the folk-story or the scroll that we have today, or some other Job."
Remember, they borrowed from each other, the Hebrews were GREAT BORROWERS! Even "Jesus" borrowed from the Hermetica
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:45 pm
by marduk
here is the king james version of a certain passage from Job
5 "The dead are in deep anguish, those beneath the waters and all that live in them. 6 Death [a] is naked before God;Destruction
lies uncovered.
and here is the original version from the hebrew bible
5 The shades tremble beneath the waters and the inhabitants thereof.
6 The nether-world is naked before Him, and Destruction hath no covering.
there was a translation of this passage in 1913 iirc by Dr James Moffat who was an advocate of the Atlantis is real theory
"The Titans tremble beneath the waters and the inhabitants thereof. Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering."
which in view of the babylonian version which came to light later is completely untenable when you compare it to the babylonian version which contains this passage which is so obviously the original
5. He sent a storm wind to the horizon;
To the breast of the earth it bore a blast
Into the depth of his ocean the disembodied spirit vanished
Unnumbered spirits he sent back to the under-world.
The................of the hag-demons he sent straight to the mountain.
So the book of Job is clearly based on the babylonian version
try and refute that one creationism
and heres all the proof you need for the Noah -Gilgamesh link
Gilgamesh: -
When a seventh day arrived
I sent forth a dove and released it.
The dove went off, but came back to me;
no perch was visible so it circled back to me.
Genesis 7
8 And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth
Gilgamesh
I sent forth a raven and released it.
The raven went off, and saw the waters slither back.
It eats, it scratches, it bobs, but does not circle back to me.
Genesis 7
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth
date of Gilgamesh 2300bce
date of Noah story 650bce
location that Noah story was written
Babylonia (formerly Akkad where the gilgamesh story was written)
Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:42 pm
by Forum Monk
marduk wrote:Gilgamesh: -
When a seventh day arrived
I sent forth a dove and released it.
The dove went off, but came back to me;
no perch was visible so it circled back to me.
Genesis 7
8 And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth
Choctaw:
The prophet floated aimlessly about for many weeks, until at last one day he saw a large black bird circling over his raft. He cried to it for help, but the bird only uttered a few harsh croaks and flew away to be seen no more.
Gilgamesh
I sent forth a raven and released it.
The raven went off, and saw the waters slither back.
It eats, it scratches, it bobs, but does not circle back to me.
Genesis 7
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth
Choctaw:
Some days later the prophet saw a smaller bird, bluish in color, with red beak and eyes, hovering over the raft. Again he asked this bird if there was a spot of dry land to be found anywhere in the waste of waters. It hovered over him for a few moments as if trying in its soft mournful voice to give the desired information, and then flew off towards the west where the new sun was again setting in splendor. Almost at once a strong wind arose which carried the raft in the direction in which the bird had gone.
In the Choctaw version, he lands on an island where the bird is staying. Different kinds of birds, different methodolgy but still the same broad brush theme.
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:02 pm
by Gary Svindal
Marduk: fyi the dna of the olmecs has been typed
it wasn't african
Reference please. Is there a link?
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:13 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
here is the king james version of a certain passage from Job
5 "The dead are in deep anguish, those beneath the waters and all that live in them. 6 Death is naked before God;Destruction lies uncovered.
and here is the original version from the hebrew bible
5 The shades tremble beneath the waters and the inhabitants thereof.
6 The nether-world is naked before Him, and Destruction hath no covering.
there was a translation of this passage in 1913 iirc by Dr James Moffat who was an advocate of the Atlantis is real theory
"The Titans tremble beneath the waters and the inhabitants thereof. Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering."
which in view of the babylonian version which came to light later is completely untenable when you compare it to the babylonian version which contains this passage which is so obviously the original
5. He sent a storm wind to the horizon;
To the breast of the earth it bore a blast
Into the depth of his ocean the disembodied spirit vanished
Unnumbered spirits he sent back to the under-world.
The................of the hag-demons he sent straight to the mountain.
So the book of Job is clearly based on the babylonian version
try and refute that one creationism
and heres all the proof you need for the Noah -Gilgamesh link
Gilgamesh: -
When a seventh day arrived
I sent forth a dove and released it.
The dove went off, but came back to me;
no perch was visible so it circled back to me.
Genesis 7
8 And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth
Gilgamesh
I sent forth a raven and released it.
The raven went off, and saw the waters slither back.
It eats, it scratches, it bobs, but does not circle back to me.
Genesis 7
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth
date of Gilgamesh 2300bce
date of Noah story 650bce
location that Noah story was written
Babylonia (formerly Akkad where the gilgamesh story was written)
And, before written word? The story doesn't start when writing started, according to the authors of the
many flood stories. Remember the oral tradition of a great flood among Native Americans?
Putting it briefly, Gilgamesh and Noah may have had a common source. Watch your correlations...they're not necessarily causal.
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 4:59 pm
by marduk
Gilgamesh and Noah may have had a common source
err no they didn't
Hebrew didnt exist until 1200bce
and they didn't have access to Akkadian texts until the 7th century bce
which just so happens to be the date that Genesis was written
its not just the writing Charlie
understanding the timings and the cultures is also important
Reference please. Is there a link?
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/ ... 503.x/abs/
The HLA allele frequency distribution of the Mexican Mazatecan Indians (Olmec culture) has been studied and compared with those of other First American Natives and worldwide populations (a total of 12,100 chromosomes; 6,050 individuals from 59 different populations). The main conclusions are: 1) An indirect evidence of Olmec and Mayan relatedness is suggested, further supporting the notion that Olmecs may have been the precursors of Mayans;
the detail is in the articles listed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmec_alte ... _consensus
Mainstream scholars remain unconvinced by these speculations. Others are more critical and regard the promotion of such unfounded theories as a form of ethnocentric racism at the expense of indigenous Americans. By an overwhelming margin the consensus view remains that the Olmec and their achievements are wholly indigenous to the region, founded entirely on a remarkable and ancient agriculture that was indigenous, and that they and neighbouring cultures, with whom they had contact, developed their own characters quite independently of any extra-hemispheric influences.
and
http://www.angelfire.com/zine/meso/meso/rossum.html
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 5:09 pm
by Charlie Hatchett
err no they didn't
Hebrew didnt exist until 1200bce
and they didn't have access to Akkadian texts until the 7th century bce
which just so happens to be the date that Genesis was written
its not just the writing Charlie
understanding the timings and the cultures is also important
err no they didn't
Err, how do you know. Are you claiming to know all of prehistory?
Hebrew didnt exist until 1200bce
And their ancestors didn't precede them?
and they didn't have access to Akkadian texts until the 7th century bce
which just so happens to be the date that Genesis was written
Again, your speaking of writing, and trying to manilulate a correlation into a causal relationship.
Here's your arguement:
X didn't exist until after the event.
Y existed after the event.
Therefore, to the exclusion of a, b, c, d...X's source must have been Y.