Archaeologica.org

In 1862, while drilling for oil in the modern Mexican state of Tabasco, a startling discovery was made. Buried beneath the jungle floor was a Colossal Stone head! Exhibiting negroid features, the head fell into none of the artistic styles of the known civilizations of Mexico. Years later in 1942, Archeologist Matthew Stirling was intrigued by this Colossal Head and began excavations at the nearby ancient city of La Venta.

What Stirling discovered shocked the world. He found evidence of an ancient civilization, one that pre-dated the mighty Mayan, Incan and Aztec civilizations! The Olmecs are now considered the "mother-culture" of Mexico
http://www.micahwright.com/olmec/colossal.html

since then its been so widely debated but the one thing that is sure is that the Olmecs themselves didn't make them
they defaced and buried them but the olmecs themselves as is known from their normal figurines and artwork are native south americans in every way, not negro, not chinese and definitely not aliens
but who are the olmec heads modelled on

the argument for africans

http://geocities.com/olmec982000/afmaya2.pdf

the argument for chinese

http://www.chinese.tcu.edu/www_chinese3_tcu_edu.htm

the argument for aliens

http://www.jornalinfinito.com.br/materias.asp?cod=111

the argument for indians

http://ctct.essortment.com/olmecnativeind_rehp.htm

only you can decide

touche, marduk

Well, Chinese and Aliens are out.

If Caral began around 3,000 BC then the Olmecs were not the "mother culture" of South America and those heads still look "African" to me.

ah but the heads don't represent the Olmecs at all

thats a misconception spread by psuedoscience

Let's be clear about something.

I don't care WHO carved them. They are called "Olmec Heads' as a convention.

WHOEVER carved them was, IMHO, trying to depict Africans and did a fairly decent job of it. What is significant is that the depiction was made at a time when traditional scholarship says there were no Africans in the new world.

Once "The Club" deals with that, then we can move on. It is crystal clear that traditional views on the peopling of the Americas are wrong.

To be fair (for once) it does seem as if the vise-like grip of the Bering Land Bridge theory has been shaken and science is progressing towards an actual understanding of what went on in the past.

Minimalist wrote:

WHOEVER carved them was, IMHO, trying to depict Africans and did a fairly decent job of it. What is significant is that the depiction was made at a time when traditional scholarship says there were no Africans in the new world.

Alright, so the heads look like carvings of Africans. Those helmuts are interesting since, as far as I know, Egyptians did not wear helmets circa 1500bce for before. Which other old world culture could it be?

and how long did it take helmet technology to reach the new world
Min clearly you are unaware that the vast majority of Olmec heads do not look african or you are the worlds best anthropologist
you've just seen the picture of the same one over and over again and thought theyre all like that
http://www.micahwright.com/olmec/colossal.html
the one that you seem to think is arican is but one of many
didn't you even look at this link
http://www.micahwright.com/olmec/colossal.html

sitchin for instance claims this one is a human alien hybrid
who's more qualified to tell
you or him or neither ?
the Nubian looking one is the poster child of the psuedoarchaology club
thats the club thats actually exists which you seem to keep missing
thatsthe one that you are a card carrying member for
and your lack of expertise in this area proves it
you just made a statement of absolute truth based on your own theory didn't you
if it wasn't your own who's was it ?

betting now it wasn't anyone qualified

Marduk,

When it comes to looking at a particular piece of artwork and deciding what the artist was trying to depict, I keep my own counsel and make my own decision.

I don't give a rat's ass what Sitchin or anyone else said.

And who ever mentioned Egyptians? It's a long way from Egypt to the West Coast of Africa and the Egyptians were not noted as great sailors.

And who ever mentioned Egyptians

cognito did

So he did!

The features on the so-called Olmec heads are African. They are often seen in certain populations in Polynesia and Australia also.

It's important to note that within the African continent itself there are many sub-types. The flat wide nose is a feature most often found on the west coast of Africa.

so you agree with Dr Winters
they came from west Africa ?

why can't they just be original creative efforts that just depict the civilizations many gods or one god? why do they have to be modeled after anyone?

creativity doesn't always need an exact original to copy from, they could have looked at their own features and used artistic license to speculate what they would look like if certain combinaqtionshappened.

i think modern science, anthropology, archaeology puts too many limits on the abilities and cognitive powers of the ancient world. (sort of like, we in the modern age are more superior to those in ancient times, which i find untrue and misleading)

Actually, I stated that the helmuts were certainly NOT Egyptian. They look more like Middle East design to me, specifically warrior. I'm gonna go google and return.

marduk wrote:so you agree with Dr Winters
they came from west Africa ?

Who is Dr. Winters?

I didn't say they came from west Africa. The one feature of the flat broad nose seems to stem from that area. I did say that.

The features, taken as a whole, and compared to other peoples of the world, strongly suggest an African descent.

As improbable as it may seem, it is no stranger than the bogus claims of some people who deny it. Sorry if it doesn't fit with the world according to Marduk.