Columbus Does Not Discover America

I think that is highly probable. I would think they could resolve that by DNA; Micronesians compared to NA Natives, but I haven't looked into the research. Watched a documentary on the Polynesian canoe voyagers the other day. Hopping from island to island, navigating by the Sun, stars and signs of bird life. They still do some of those as a cultural exercise. Amazing stuff, not to mention darned courageous. Those canoes were a heck of a lot smaller than the Santa Maria!
 

rt3 said:
Have you explored (pun intended) possibilities of pre Asian migration by Polynesia islanders into South America and their migration into the north forming some of the Indian nations.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I feel that their watercraft would have been inadequate to launch a full exploration invasion of a country like the continental U.S, was at the time. It would take a more sophisticated culture whose aggression was more develloped and focused. IMHO. They could and did take small islands. But I don't see them settling the Americas successfully.
 
Underock1 said:
The things I find interesting tend to bore most people. Thanks for saving this thread from a horrible death.
Click to expand...

I don't find the things that interest you boring at all. It was brave of you to tackle a "politically incorrect" subject - kudos! The thread would not have died a horrible death. There are too many intelligent minds at SF for that to happen. If we took a subject less controversial topic like what would have happened to the class division system in the U.K. had World War I never happened, or what would've happened to the age of enlightenment if the French Revolution of 1789 never occured, I'm sure we'd get lots of replies.
 

chic said:
Yes, but I feel that their watercraft would have been inadequate to launch a full exploration invasion of a country like the continental U.S, was at the time. It would take a more sophisticated culture whose aggression was more develloped and focused. IMHO. They could and did take small islands. But I don't see them settling the Americas successfully.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, Chic. I was going to respond just from my own recall, but decided to check out the latest. As of 2010, it is pretty well established that Polynesians did in fact settle in S America. They have found the bones of their chickens.:smug1: Chickens native to Polynesia, not to S America at the time. Not only that, they have found Sweet Potatoes in Polynesia. Not native to that area. Native to SA. So we are talking round trip here. Finally, they have identified a few human bones from the native population of the time as Polynesian. We are not talking about a conquest of S America by Polynesians. There was no one there to conquer. More a matter of pre-existing small settlements surviving and eventually interbreeding and being absorbed into the larger population of NA natives as they migrated South.
 
chic said:
I don't find the things that interest you boring at all. It was brave of you to tackle a "politically incorrect" subject - kudos! The thread would not have died a horrible death. There are too many intelligent minds at SF for that to happen. If we took a subject less controversial topic like what would have happened to the class division system in the U.K. had World War I never happened, or what would've happened to the age of enlightenment if the French Revolution of 1789 never occured, I'm sure we'd get lots of replies.
Click to expand...

Nah. On this thread its you, me and rt3. I know that the things that interest me a lot, interest the larger population little. Its not a matter of intelligence. I get that there are many more entertaining and interesting things in the world than the doings of a few native people hundreds of years ago. By the way, I also read that the DNA of S American natives has shown up in the Easter Islanders. So we have pretty good evidence of two way contact.
 
The small boat problem can, and was solved by using catamaran type sets ups like the early Greek bridges.

I think the main reason for the adherence to the Colombus day myths are all from the legal end of the spectrum. Any change from this and property boundaries would have to be redrawn.
 
History was my favorite subject in school. That was before I realized how much of it is inaccurate.

The Vikings were on North America 500 years before Columbus.
 
Shirley said:
History was my favorite subject in school. That was before I realized how much of it is inaccurate.

The Vikings were on North America 500 years before Columbus.
Click to expand...

that's why it was interesting (entertaining), if it were the truth it wouldn't be interesting
 
Shirley said:
History was my favorite subject in school. That was before I realized how much of it is inaccurate.

The Vikings were on North America 500 years before Columbus.
Click to expand...

The natives arrived long before that. Before they arrived the mammoth's were living an idyllic, peaceful life excpt for those pesky scimitar cats.
School was the worst place to learn history. Particularly back in my day. I try to read from original sources when available. Not easy without access to an academic library of some sort. Thank you Penguin Publishing!
I have a paperback copy of Hakluyt's Voyages. If you want to know the attitudes of the early explorers, read a copy of the instructions to the captains describing various ways to trick and capture any newly encountered natives.
 
rt3 said:
The small boat problem can, and was solved by using catamaran type sets ups like the early Greek bridges.

I think the main reason for the adherence to the Colombus day myths are all from the legal end of the spectrum. Any change from this and property boundaries would have to be redrawn.
Click to expand...

Have you seen the documentary on the Polynesian voyagers? Fascinating stuff. They still train people and make trips to Hawaii
and back in those canoes as a cultural thing. Kind of like historical re-enactors.
 
Underock1 said:
Have you seen the documentary on the Polynesian voyagers? Fascinating stuff. They still train people and make trips to Hawaii
and back in those canoes as a cultural thing. Kind of like historical re-enactors.
Click to expand...

I trace the changes more from a study of that cultures stories, myths, and folklore. The portrayal of the hero epic is universal in all cultures, the differences in how the hero used transportation, weapons etc. give clues as to the "flow". as an example swords, especially curved and steel are not native to the western hemisphere. pictures in the western hemisphere or stories involving these are worth looking into. Elephants are another example. none exist, but there are stone statues in central America etc.
 
chic said:
If Columbus does not discover America, the Native Americans are free to rule until the Japanese decide to cross the Berring Strait, travel down through Alaska and Canada into California where they are challenged by the Mexicans for supremacy in North America. They (the Mexicans) do a deal where The Japanese take Northern CA and the Mexicans take Southern CA and there's a wholly frijole time at the taco stand cum sushi bar. They intermarry, build railroads, establish farms and ranches until they eventually reach New York where everyone settles happily except the Native Americans who continue to war with each other until only two tribes remain. They join up eventually with the Mexicans because they love the siestas and the Japanese work too damned hard anyway and who understands all that electronics mumbo jumbo.

Sorry to take the light hearted approach here, but I'm not sure what was required.
Click to expand...

Very cute Chic and to an extent, partly true. đź‘Ś
 
rt3 said:
I trace the changes more from a study of that cultures stories, myths, and folklore. The portrayal of the hero epic is universal in all cultures, the differences in how the hero used transportation, weapons etc. give clues as to the "flow". as an example swords, especially curved and steel are not native to the western hemisphere. pictures in the western hemisphere or stories involving these are worth looking into. Elephants are another example. none exist, but there are stone statues in central America etc.
Click to expand...

Conclusions from interpretations of primitive stone sculptures are notoriously misleading in my estimation. I often see documentaries showing a sculptured stone head wearing what is undoubtedly ordinary native head wear. It could be just as well interpreted as a football helmet. The TV pseudo-documentaries often promote it as an alien in a space helmet! " Wow! Aliens were here!" They love to do that. They also love making connections between the pyramids and the Aztec and Indonesian temples. Aliens must have come down and taught us how to do that. Well guess what? If you give a five year old a bag of blocks, the first thing he will build is a pyramid. Not because he was instructed from outer space, but because its the simplest thing to do and his common sense hasn't been warped out of him yet by a bunch of silly adults.
 
no doubt some of them are wearing it to look good, but consistencies crop up. not much of an alien fan here, I think it diminishes and lowers the entire earth event. pyramids are interesting more from the nature of the ratio of the base to the height. If you drop sand as in an hour glass it will pile up until it reaches this ration before cascading down the sides. This is called self organizational criticality in Information theory, and has significance in theories that deal with the definition of consciousness. connect this crystal growth and biological self similarities and some things take on a new light.
 
rt3 said:
no doubt some of them are wearing it to look good, but consistencies crop up. not much of an alien fan here, I think it diminishes and lowers the entire earth event. pyramids are interesting more from the nature of the ratio of the base to the height. If you drop sand as in an hour glass it will pile up until it reaches this ration before cascading down the sides. This is called self organizational criticality in Information theory, and has significance in theories that deal with the definition of consciousness. connect this crystal growth and biological self similarities and some things take on a new light.
Click to expand...

Its like those connect the dots pictures that we did as kids. Connect the wrong dots and you get an entirely different picture. I followed you up to "self organizational criticality". I think I'll stick with my bag of blocks view.
 
AZ Jim said:
Actually, unless you hobby in history, I see it as a moot issue. We are here now.
Click to expand...

...and gone tomorrow. I absolutely agree, Jim. History is a major interest of mine, but not something to kill over,
unless you're in the Mideast, the Balkans, Indonesia, Sub Saharan Africa, Northern Ireland, etc.
I love it, but there are times when I think we would be much better off if we were all struck with historic Alzheimers and forgot who we were supposed to hate.
 
Without history, how can anyone understand what is happening now in current events, or even understand what was really happening during the last big war. There are always complex historical events leading up to everything. History books tell us a lot, especially now that information is readily accessible, and online research and university programs provide much more, for those who are interested. You really can't go by what they want us to know on the news.
 
rt3 said:
The small boat problem can, and was solved by using catamaran type sets ups like the early Greek bridges.

I think the main reason for the adherence to the Colombus day myths are all from the legal end of the spectrum. Any change from this and property boundaries would have to be redrawn.
Click to expand...

Okay. Point taken but I don't see the Polynesians having the numbers, organizational skills, and agressiveness to transport the stores, equipment, weapons, and sundries neccessary to launch a successful invasion of continental America which was why I chose the Japanese to conquer first because despite whatever watercraft they may have chosen they were physically closer to American soil and it would be easier to finance and launch a successful invasion
/exploration or whatever you wish to call it. It would require much larger vessels to transport an army and the foundation materials for permanent settlements, I think, than those they had at the time. Just my humble opinion.
 
Underock1 said:
Conclusions from interpretations of primitive stone sculptures are notoriously misleading in my estimation. I often see documentaries showing a sculptured stone head wearing what is undoubtedly ordinary native head wear. It could be just as well interpreted as a football helmet. The TV pseudo-documentaries often promote it as an alien in a space helmet! " Wow! Aliens were here!" They love to do that. They also love making connections between the pyramids and the Aztec and Indonesian temples. Aliens must have come down and taught us how to do that. Well guess what? If you give a five year old a bag of blocks, the first thing he will build is a pyramid. Not because he was instructed from outer space, but because its the simplest thing to do and his common sense hasn't been warped out of him yet by a bunch of silly adults.
Click to expand...

Very true, I agree. They'd try to make us believe that aliens "built" everything from Easter Island to Stonehenge. Why can't early man have solved these engineering problems for themselves?? But then again. Some believe in Bigfoot. There you go.
 
chic said:
Okay. Point taken but I don't see the Polynesians having the numbers, organizational skills, and agressiveness to transport the stores, equipment, weapons, and sundries neccessary to launch a successful invasion of continental America which was why I chose the Japanese to conquer first because despite whatever watercraft they may have chosen they were physically closer to American soil and it would be easier to finance and launch a successful invasion
/exploration or whatever you wish to call it. It would require much larger vessels to transport an army and the foundation materials for permanent settlements, I think, than those they had at the time. Just my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

You're right, Chic. I have been doing a little more reading. The chicken theory for Polynesian contact has been knocked, and we are back to questioning whether there was any contact at all. I personally think there probably was, but of insignificant impact. Certainly, there was never going to be any grand conquest of the Americas by the Polynesians.
 
chic said:
Okay. Point taken but I don't see the Polynesians having the numbers, organizational skills, and agressiveness to transport the stores, equipment, weapons, and sundries neccessary to launch a successful invasion of continental America which was why I chose the Japanese to conquer first because despite whatever watercraft they may have chosen they were physically closer to American soil and it would be easier to finance and launch a successful invasion
/exploration or whatever you wish to call it. It would require much larger vessels to transport an army and the foundation materials for permanent settlements, I think, than those they had at the time. Just my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

chic said:
Very true, I agree. They'd try to make us believe that aliens "built" everything from Easter Island to Stonehenge. Why can't early man have solved these engineering problems for themselves?? But then again. Some believe in Bigfoot. There you go.
Click to expand...

:what1: You mean you don't believe in Bigfoot?!!
 
Some assumptions may need to be addressed, and I offer these for your perusal.

humankind has been at the same intellectual capacity sense the beginning. Only the consious awareness of their role in scheme of thing has increased

science and technology are not the same thing

we place assumptions on historical events based on a higher consious awareness that does not offer an explanation as to why events transpired as they did.

ex. While watching a movie about early Greeks the two main characters, and with strong British accents ( which was more than entertaining in the least) were discussing their tactical alternatives using the future perfect progressive verb congugations. No way did the Greeks in this time period use this structure. It didn't come about until translations such as Homer put them in. It is almost impossible for us now to reconstruct their thought patterns. It takes a lot of practice.
ex, Trojan war, Achilles is pissed at Ulysses and would rather die in the light of truth (Apollo) than be deceitful and build a Trojan horse. In those times the folks talked with Gods daily and everybody accepted it as just another thing. there was no concept of unit time. Try holding a conversation or a series of thoughts only in the present tense with yourself or another.
Ulysses Trojan horse was one of the first recorded deceptions and that's why it worked, the Trojans were operating in a world were what you see is what you get. Ulysses higher level on consious led him on a 20 or so year travel called the Odessey or translated "Hard Journey". It was not a geographical storey tour for children but a period of relearning with increase consious awareness-- A Brave New World. As does Disney stories it is redressed.
Some cultures call this a walk about.
the pyramids are structures of incarnation not reincarnation or burial temples.
So the next time you look a gift horse in the mouth it may by a Polynesian with a stolen mask bearing gifts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top