...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » African Nautical Experience is 100kya

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: African Nautical Experience is 100kya
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Africans were in Brazil 100kya. They could only have reached Brazil by crossing the Atlantic Ocean by boat.

Thanks Ironlion for bringing to our attention this important article.

Fire unless the result of lightening is produced by man. The evidence that fire existed in Brazil 65kya is an indication that man was at the site 65,000 years ago, since researchers found charcoal, which is the result of fire making.
The New York Times, reported that humans were Brazil 100,000 years ago .

If you would see the New York Times video you would noted that Dr.Nieda Guidon supports her dating of human population in Brazil 100,000 years ago to ancient fire and tool making.
Look at the New York Times video: Human’s First Appearance in the Americas @:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world/americas/discoveries-challenge-beliefs-on-humans-arrival-in-the-americas.html?hp&_r=4


If you view the video you will see that human occupation of Brazil 100,000 years ago is supported by man made fire, e.g., the charcoal, and tools.

Dr. Guidon who conducted excavation at the site notes at 2:09 the site is 100,000 years old. At 3:17 in the video scientists proved that the tools are the result of human craftsmanship . You reject this evidence because it proves that Blacks were here before the mongoloids.

It is interesting that it is becoming clear that people may have left Africa 100kya, instead of 60kya to settle the world. This may indicate that Australians made their way to America before the Khoisan.


.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
On Crete, New Evidence of Very Ancient Mariners, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/science/16archeo.html
.

 -


.


By JOHN NOBLE WILFORDFEB. 15, 2010


HARDWARE Stone tools found on Crete are evidence of early sea voyages. Credit Nicholas Thompson and Chad DiGregorio
Early humans, possibly even prehuman ancestors, appear to have been going to sea much longer than anyone had ever suspected.

That is the startling implication of discoveries made the last two summers on the Greek island of Crete. Stone tools found there, archaeologists say, are at least 130,000 years old, which is considered strong evidence for the earliest known seafaring in the Mediterranean and cause for rethinking the maritime capabilities of prehuman cultures.

Crete has been an island for more than five million years, meaning that the toolmakers must have arrived by boat. So this seems to push the history of Mediterranean voyaging back more than 100,000 years, specialists in Stone Age archaeology say. Previous artifact discoveries had shown people reaching Cyprus, a few other Greek islands and possibly Sardinia no earlier than 10,000 to 12,000 years ago.

The oldest established early marine travel anywhere was the sea-crossing migration of anatomically modern Homo sapiens to Australia, beginning about 60,000 years ago. There is also a suggestive trickle of evidence, notably the skeletons and artifacts on the Indonesian island of Flores, of more ancient hominids making their way by water to new habitats.

Even more intriguing, the archaeologists who found the tools on Crete noted that the style of the hand axes suggested that they could be up to 700,000 years old. That may be a stretch, they conceded, but the tools resemble artifacts from the stone technology known as Acheulean, which originated with prehuman populations in Africa.

More than 2,000 stone artifacts, including the hand axes, were collected on the southwestern shore of Crete, near the town of Plakias, by a team led by Thomas F. Strasser and Eleni Panagopoulou. She is with the Greek Ministry of Culture and he is an associate professor of art history at Providence College in Rhode Island. They were assisted by Greek and American geologists and archaeologists, including Curtis Runnels of Boston University.

Dr. Strasser described the discovery last month at a meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America. A formal report has been accepted for publication in Hesparia, the journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, a supporter of the fieldwork.

The Plakias survey team went in looking for material remains of more recent artisans, nothing older than 11,000 years. Such artifacts would have been blades, spear points and arrowheads typical of Mesolithic and Neolithic periods.

“We found those, then we found the hand axes,” Dr. Strasser said last week in an interview, and that sent the team into deeper time.

“We were flummoxed,” Dr. Runnels said in an interview. “These things were just not supposed to be there.”


Word of the find is circulating among the ranks of Stone Age scholars. The few who have seen the data and some pictures — most of the tools reside in Athens — said they were excited and cautiously impressed. The research, if confirmed by further study, scrambles timetables of technological development and textbook accounts of human and prehuman mobility.

Ofer Bar-Yosef, an authority on Stone Age archaeology at Harvard, said the significance of the find would depend on the dating of the site. “Once the investigators provide the dates,” he said in an e-mail message, “we will have a better understanding of the importance of the discovery.”

Dr. Bar-Yosef said he had seen only a few photographs of the Cretan tools. The forms can only indicate a possible age, he said, but “handling the artifacts may provide a different impression.” And dating, he said, would tell the tale.

Dr. Runnels, who has 30 years’ experience in Stone Age research, said that an analysis by him and three geologists “left not much doubt of the age of the site, and the tools must be even older.”

The cliffs and caves above the shore, the researchers said, have been uplifted by tectonic forces where the African plate goes under and pushes up the European plate. The exposed uplifted layers represent the sequence of geologic periods that have been well studied and dated, in some cases correlated to established dates of glacial and interglacial periods of the most recent ice age. In addition, the team analyzed the layer bearing the tools and determined that the soil had been on the surface 130,000 to 190,000 years ago.

Dr. Runnels said he considered this a minimum age for the tools themselves. They include not only quartz hand axes, but also cleavers and scrapers, all of which are in the Acheulean style. The tools could have been made millenniums before they became, as it were, frozen in time in the Cretan cliffs, the archaeologists said.

Dr. Runnels suggested that the tools could be at least twice as old as the geologic layers. Dr. Strasser said they could be as much as 700,000 years old. Further explorations are planned this summer.

The 130,000-year date would put the discovery in a time when Homo sapiens had already evolved in Africa, sometime after 200,000 years ago. Their presence in Europe did not become apparent until about 50,000 years ago.

Archaeologists can only speculate about who the toolmakers were. One hundred and thirty thousand years ago, modern humans shared the world with other hominids, like Neanderthals and Homo heidelbergensis. The Acheulean culture is thought to have started with Homo erectus.

The standard hypothesis had been that Acheulean toolmakers reached Europe and Asia via the Middle East, passing mainly through what is now Turkey into the Balkans. The new finds suggest that their dispersals were not confined to land routes. They may lend credibility to proposals of migrations from Africa across the Strait of Gibraltar to Spain. Crete’s southern shore where the tools were found is 200 miles from North Africa.


“We can’t say the toolmakers came 200 miles from Libya,” Dr. Strasser said. “If you’re on a raft, that’s a long voyage, but they might have come from the European mainland by way of shorter crossings through Greek islands.”

But archaeologists and experts on early nautical history said the discovery appeared to show that these surprisingly ancient mariners had craft sturdier and more reliable than rafts. They also must have had the cognitive ability to conceive and carry out repeated water crossing over great distances in order to establish sustainable populations producing an abundance of stone artifacts.


.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
Pangea and Humans certainly did not exist togther, I am not even sure if a rodent like animal existed back then, man did not walk with dinosaur for that's what the above pic would be suggesting.
 -
Hugging the coast seem a more reasonable option, traveling on water craft while improbable is not impossible.

Brada it is time we take a serious look at the nautical history of African people. The idea that the first civilizations in Africa were solely hunter-gather without boat technology is groundless. We have to move away from European ideas about the origins of sailing and boat technology.


Your argument about hugging the coast is a valid argument. But the varied style of crafts depicted in the Sahara indicate that Africans made seacraft that was capable of traveling in rough waters and in the Ocean.
 -


Look at this map of the Mega lakes that formerly existed in Africa.
.

 -


.

These lakes were thousands of miles long. The weather on these inland seas given the size of the lakes would have made conditions similar to what sailors would have experienced sailing in the Ocean.

 -

Moreover we find that by 100kya African tool kits appear in Brazil and on the island of Crete. This archaeological evidence indicates that Africans were sailing great distances at a time we believe that AMH were simply gathering seeds and berries to eat—instead of fishing for supplemental source of food.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ancient Arabian Artifacts May Rewrite 'Out of Africa' Story, http://www.livescience.com/11651-ancient-arabian-artifacts-rewrite-oout-africao-story.html

By Charles Q. Choi, Live Science Contributor | January 27, 2011 06:59am ET


Arabia was a legendary crossroads between East and West for centuries. Now scientists find it might have been pivotal at the dawn of history as the launching point for modern humans leaving Africa to expand across the rest of the world.

Artifacts dating back at least 100,000 years unearthed in the Arabian desert might be evidence of the first step our lineage took in our march across the globe. These new findings suggest modern humans first left Africa by at least 40,000 years earlier than researchers had expected, which could rewrite our understanding of ancient sites elsewhere on the planet.

Anatomically modern humans first arose about 200,000 years ago in Africa. When and how our lineage then dispersed out of Africa has long proven controversial, but past evidence had suggested an exodus along the Mediterranean Sea or Arabian coast some 60,000 years ago.

Now, an ancient toolkit of stone hand axes, scrapers and perforators discovered by an international team of researchers at a site in the United Arab Emirates suggests modern humans arrived in eastern Arabia as early as 125,000 years ago.

"Our findings should stimulate a re-evaluation of the means by which we modern humans became a global species," said researcher Simon Armitage at the University of London.

Rocky picnic spot

The site in question, an ancient rock shelter named Jebel Faya about 34 miles (55 kilometers) inland from the coast of the Persian Gulf, was originally known "as a nice shady picnic place for a weekend," said researcher Hans-Peter Uerpmann from Eberhard Karls University in Tübingen, Germany.

The fact that spots around Jebel Faya had stone tools suggested that artifacts might lie buried at the site.

"They were covered by layers of sand and gravel, which had accumulated since the Stone Age," Uerpmann explained.

They started digging trenches to excavate the site in 2003. "Once a camel fell into a trench and we had trouble with the Bedouins, but otherwise, the area is very safe and no problems at all with the locals, who come and are very interested," Uerpmann told LiveScience.

In 2006, the researchers discovered a stone hand ax that suggested the site might be far older than they suspected. Using a technique known as optically stimulated luminescence dating, which measures the minute amount of light long-buried objects can emit to see how long they have been interred, Armitage determined the artifacts were about 100,000 to 125,000 years old.

This hand ax and other artifacts the scientists discovered resembled technology used by early humans in east Africa, but not the craftsmanship that emerged from elsewhere in the Middle East, explained researcher Anthony Marks at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. The tools were probably not the creations of archaic humans such as Neanderthals, he noted, as the closest known Neanderthal band was thousands of miles away.

Early humans rafted out of Africa

By analyzing historical sea-level records for the region as well as details of past climate preserved in ancient lakes and rivers, sand dunes and cave stalagmites, the scientists reconstructed what the environment of the site was once like. Their findings suggest, that rather than technological innovations, a change in the environment was the key behind the expansion of modern humans out of Africa.

The investigators determined that sea levels in the southern Red Sea 130,000 years ago were more than 330 feet (100 meters) lower than today. This meant that the Bab al-Mandab Strait, which separates Arabia from the Horn of Africa, would have dried up and been much narrower, perhaps just 2.5 miles (4 km) wide, enough to allow safe passage with rafts or boats, Uerpmann said.

Although this site is now arid to hyper-arid, it was far wetter and greener in the past, "covered largely in savannah grasslands with extensive lakes and river systems," said researcher Adrian Parker at the University of London. There would have been great numbers of prey there for people to hunt, Uerpmann added — the oryx antelope, the wild ass, mountain ibex goats and several species of gazelle.

Instead of exiting Africa by traveling farther north over the Sinai Peninsula, "our findings open a second way, which in my opinion is more plausible for massive movements than the northern route," Uerpmann said. Ultimately, early humans could then have wandered into the Fertile Crescent and India and into the rest of Europe and Asia.

"These artifacts are a good sample pointing in an interesting direction," said paleoanthropologist John Hawks at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. "It'd always be nice to have skeletal materials to analyze, but it's so rare that we do."

"The longer timeline they propose matches the genetics quite well in some ways," added Hawks, who was not involved in this study. If you look at DNA from inside the human cell nucleus, "it points to a divergence time for populations inside Africa and present-day non-Africans of about 140,000 years."

However, when it comes to DNA in human mitochondria — the powerhouses of the cell, which come from each person's mother — "that has for a long time pointed at a date of 60,000 to 70,000 years ago for dispersal out of Africa," Hawks said. "So at present, we can't explain why that is." [Age Confirmed for 'Eve', Mother of All Humans ]

"It's possible that the people who initially left Africa were a small isolated population who became quite limited in mitochondrial diversity, or there were selective pressures acting on people with those mitochondria," he added. "Or it could just be we've gotten the timescales with mitochondrial DNA wrong. We don't know as of yet."

The fact that modern humans may have circulated around the world much earlier than thought raises the question of how they might have interacted or even interbred with extinct lineages such as the Neanderthals or Denisovans (a recently discovered new branch of humanity).

"The simple model of modern humans dispersing out of Africa just got more complicated," Hawks said.

"The full scope of potential conclusions, which may derive from our findings, cannot be foreseen at the time being," Uerpmann said.

The scientists detailed their findings in the Jan. 28 issue of the journal Science.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ewen Callaway, (2015) Teeth from China reveal early human trek out of Africa "Stunning" find shows that Homo sapiens reached Asia around 100,000 years ago. http://www.nature.com/news/teeth-from-china-reveal-early-human-trek-out-of-africa-1.18566?WT.mc_id=FBK_NatureNews

Teeth from a cave in south China show that Homo sapiens reached China around 100,000 years ago — a time at which most researchers had assumed that our species had not trekked far beyond Africa.

“This is stunning, it’s major league,” says Michael Petraglia, an archaeologist at the University of Oxford, UK who was not involved in the research. “It’s one of the most important finds coming out of Asia in the last decade.”

Limestone caves pockmark Daoxian County in Hunan Province, China. Recent excavations of a cave system there extending over 3 square kilometres discovered 47 human teeth, as well as the remains of hyenas, extinct giant pandas and dozens of other animal species. The researchers found no stone tools; it is likely that humans never lived in the cave and their remains were instead hauled in by predators.


The teeth are unquestionably those of H. sapiens, says María Martinón-Torres, a palaeoanthropologist at University College London who co-led the study with colleagues Wu Liu and Xiu-jie Wu at the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology in Beijing. Their small size, thin roots and flat crowns are typical for anatomically modern humans — H. sapiens — and the overall shape of the teeth is barely distinguishable from those of both ancient and present-day humans. The team report their results in Nature today1.

Determining the age of the teeth proved tricky. They contained no radioactive carbon (which has almost vanished after 50,000 years). So the team dated various calcite deposits in the cave and used the assortment of animal remains to deduce that the human teeth were probably between 80,000 and 120,000 years old.

Early trekkers
Those ages buck the conventional wisdom that H. sapiens from Africa began colonizing the world only around 50,000–60,000 years ago, says Martinón-Torres. Older traces of modern humans have been seen outside Africa, such as the roughly 100,000-year-old remains from the Skhul and Qafzeh Caves in Israel. But many researchers had argued that those remains were only evidence of unsuccessful efforts at wider migration.


IVPP
Researchers María Martinón-Torres, José María Bermúdez de Castro, Wu Liu and Xiu-jie Wu in the cave.
Expand
“This demonstrates it was not a failed dispersal,” says Petraglia, who has long argued for an early expansion of modern humans through Asia on a southerly route. “This is a rock-solid case for having early humans — definitely Homo sapiens — at an early date in eastern Asia.” Chris Stringer, a palaeoanthropologist at the Natural History Museum in London who had argued that remains from Skhul and Qafzeh signified unsuccesful migrations, says that he is now swayed by the Daoxian teeth.

Without DNA from the teeth, it is impossible to determine the relationship between the Daoxian people and other humans, including present-day Asians. But Jean-Jacques Hublin, a palaeoanthropologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, thinks that later waves of humans replaced them. Other genetic evidence suggests that present-day East Asians descend from humans who interbred with Neanderthals in western Asia some 55,000–60,000 years ago, Hublin notes.

Related stories
Neanderthals gain human neighbour
Oldest-known human genome sequenced
Step by step around the globe
More related stories
It is also not clear why modern humans would have reached East Asia so long before they reached Europe, where the earliest remains are about 45,000 years old. Martinón-Torres suggests that humans could not gain a foothold in Europe until Neanderthals there were teetering on extinction. The frigid climate of Ice Age Europe may have erected another barrier to people adapted to Africa, says Petraglia.

Although Hublin says there is a good case that the Daoxian teeth are older than 80,000 years, he notes that several of the teeth have visible cavities, a feature uncommon in human teeth older than 50,000 years. “It could be that early modern humans had a peculiar diet in tropical Asia,” he says. “But I am pretty sure that this observation will raise some eyebrows." Martinon-Torres says her team plans to look more closely at the cavities and the diet of the Daoxian humans by examining patterns of tooth wear.

Southern China is filled with similar caves that may colour in more details of humans’ early exploits, such as the tools they made. “This is just the tip of the iceberg,” Petraglia says. “There’s a lot more work that needs to be done."

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DD'eDeN
Member
Member # 21966

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for DD'eDeN     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The plant component of an Acheulian diet at Gesher Benot YaŒaqov, Israel
Yoel Melamed, Mordechai E Kislev, Eli Geffen, Simcha Lev-Yadun & Naama
Goren-Inbar 2016
PNAS doi 10.1073/pnas.1607872113
<http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2016/11/29/1607872113#>


Our knowledge of the diet of early hominins derives mainly from animal
skeletal remains found in archaeological sites, leading to a bias toward a
protein-based diet.
We report on the earliest known archive of food plants found in the
superimposed Acheulian sites excavated at Gesher Benot Ya'aqov.
These remains (c 780 ka) comprise 55 taxa, incl. nuts, fruits, seeds,
vegetables & plants, producing underground storage organs (USOs).
They reflect
- a varied plant diet,
- staple plant foods,
- seasonality,
- hominins' environmental knowledge &
- use of fire in food processing.
Our results change previous notions of paleo-diet
they shed light on hominin abilities to adjust to new environments &
exploit different flora, facilitating population diffusion, survival &
colonization beyond Africa.

Posts: 2021 | From: Miami | Registered: Aug 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hi Clyde, all human populations 100kya were African physically. There were no other "types" of humans at that time. But what evidence do you have for human settlement in Brazil 100kya ago? And what evidence do you have for direct African travel to Brazil 100kya ago?

You know a lot of scholars have talked about direct African travel to Central and South America prior to European contact but none to my knowledge has found any direct evidence. On the other hand many European scholars have pointed out the "Africoid" features of the early remains in Central and Southern America, ie Luzia and theorized populations from either the Pacific or Australia. Nobody yet has any proof of direct African contact in this time period.

This New York times article is the first time I have heard of European scholars claiming direct African settlement in the Americas. But there is no hard evidence there.

Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
Hi Clyde, all human populations 100kya were African physically. There were no other "types" of humans at that time. But what evidence do you have for human settlement in Brazil 100kya ago? And what evidence do you have for direct African travel to Brazil 100kya ago?

You know a lot of scholars have talked about direct African travel to Central and South America prior to European contact but none to my knowledge has found any direct evidence. On the other hand many European scholars have pointed out the "Africoid" features of the early remains in Central and Southern America, ie Luzia and theorized populations from either the Pacific or Australia. Nobody yet has any proof of direct African contact in this time period.

This New York times article is the first time I have heard of European scholars claiming direct African settlement in the Americas.

Check these sources out:

http://earthmysterynews.com/2016/09/07/did-paleoamericans-reach-south-america-first/


https://www.academia.edu/17137182/THE_PALEOAMERICANS_CAME_FROM_AFRICA


Guidon N and Arnaud B (1991).The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.
World Architecture , 23(2) 167-178.

Guidon N and Delibrias G (1986).Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32, 000 years ago.
Nature 321 769-771.

Guidon N et al.,(1996). Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay. Antiquity, 70 , 408.
.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brada-Anansi
Member
Member # 16371

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Brada-Anansi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Again while I am not saying this is impossible but improbable, 100,000 yrs ago, or even later why would Hg man venture leaving valuable and predictable food source behind to enter the open ocean with families, being that the pattern of early migration of Hgs simply followed their food source to other lands/continents , we are not talking of imperial ambitions here of later kings who at a whim decide to expand an empire or go looking for trade routes, we would have to look at the conditions of climate and availability of resources or lack thereof ,example if there was nowhere else to go but to sea or die, even the Pacific expansion was a whim of chiefs and kings and a great deal of that was simply Island hopping. early man reaching Australia was possible because he could see the coastal out line from island nearby.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
CLYDE IS WRONG
They came of 200,000 years ago not 100,000
This is proven by falsification. Clyde can't falsify 200,000 years ago so it's true

Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Brada-Anansi:
Again while I am not saying this is impossible but improbable, 100,000 yrs ago, or even later why would Hg man venture leaving valuable and predictable food source behind to enter the open ocean with families, being that the pattern of early migration of Hgs simply followed their food source to other lands/continents , we are not talking of imperial ambitions here of later kings who at a whim decide to expand an empire or go looking for trade routes, we would have to look at the conditions of climate and availability of resources or lack thereof ,example if there was nowhere else to go but to sea or die, even the Pacific expansion was a whim of chiefs and kings and a great deal of that was simply Island hopping. early man reaching Australia was possible because he could see the coastal out line from island nearby.

People set sail on the sea for three reasons 1) in search of a better life, 2) spirit of adventure and 3) trade.

For example, Europeans left valuable and predictable food sources behind to enter the open ocean with their families to find a better life in the Americas and Pacific Islands.

The Axumites (Naga) sailed the Indian Ocean in search of trade and established colonies in India and Southeast Asia. The Kushites after the great flood sailed to Mesopotamia, Indus Valley and Southern China and reestablished Anu trade centers destroyed as a result of the flood.


The best example of the spirit of adventure would be Abubakari of Mali, who along with over 20,000 followers set sail in the Atlantic to see what was across the Ocean.

This whole idea of Island hoping as the main reason for early man setting sail to find new lands is a myth. Columbus' voyage is a good example of man taking a chance to discover a new land without trying to reach there by Island hoping.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
CLYDE IS WRONG
They came of 200,000 years ago not 100,000
This is proven by falsification. Clyde can't falsify 200,000 years ago so it's true

True I can not falsify 200,000 years. But I can falsify 100kya.

This is done by hypothesizing that if people living in Brazil and Crete 100kya used tool kits identical to those found in Africa, they must of originallly came from Africa; and if they could not walk to Brazil and Crete overland they had to have reached there by boat.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
Hi Clyde, all human populations 100kya were African physically. There were no other "types" of humans at that time. But what evidence do you have for human settlement in Brazil 100kya ago? And what evidence do you have for direct African travel to Brazil 100kya ago?

You know a lot of scholars have talked about direct African travel to Central and South America prior to European contact but none to my knowledge has found any direct evidence. On the other hand many European scholars have pointed out the "Africoid" features of the early remains in Central and Southern America, ie Luzia and theorized populations from either the Pacific or Australia. Nobody yet has any proof of direct African contact in this time period.

This New York times article is the first time I have heard of European scholars claiming direct African settlement in the Americas.

Check these sources out:

http://earthmysterynews.com/2016/09/07/did-paleoamericans-reach-south-america-first/


https://www.academia.edu/17137182/THE_PALEOAMERICANS_CAME_FROM_AFRICA


Guidon N and Arnaud B (1991).The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.
World Architecture , 23(2) 167-178.

Guidon N and Delibrias G (1986).Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32, 000 years ago.
Nature 321 769-771.

Guidon N et al.,(1996). Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay. Antiquity, 70 , 408.
.

Thanks. Neither of these articles provide 'hard' evidence of direct African navigation to the Americas. It is all theoretical similar to Thor Heyerdal's experiments in the past. For all we know they could have come from Asia or the Pacific. I really would like to see evidence of direct African contact found in the Americas because people have been talking about it for a long time without much direct proof.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
Hi Clyde, all human populations 100kya were African physically. There were no other "types" of humans at that time. But what evidence do you have for human settlement in Brazil 100kya ago? And what evidence do you have for direct African travel to Brazil 100kya ago?

You know a lot of scholars have talked about direct African travel to Central and South America prior to European contact but none to my knowledge has found any direct evidence. On the other hand many European scholars have pointed out the "Africoid" features of the early remains in Central and Southern America, ie Luzia and theorized populations from either the Pacific or Australia. Nobody yet has any proof of direct African contact in this time period.

This New York times article is the first time I have heard of European scholars claiming direct African settlement in the Americas.

Check these sources out:

http://earthmysterynews.com/2016/09/07/did-paleoamericans-reach-south-america-first/


https://www.academia.edu/17137182/THE_PALEOAMERICANS_CAME_FROM_AFRICA


Guidon N and Arnaud B (1991).The chronology of the New World: Two faces of one reality.
World Architecture , 23(2) 167-178.

Guidon N and Delibrias G (1986).Carbon-14 dates point to man in the Americas 32, 000 years ago.
Nature 321 769-771.

Guidon N et al.,(1996). Nature and Age of the Deposits in Pedra Furada, Brazil: Reply to Meltzer, Adovasio & Dillehay. Antiquity, 70 , 408.
.

Thanks. Neither of these articles provide 'hard' evidence of direct African navigation to the Americas. It is all theoretical similar to Thor Heyerdal's experiments in the past. For all we know they could have come from Asia or the Pacific. I really would like to see evidence of direct African contact found in the Americas because people have been talking about it for a long time without much direct proof.
 -


How can you say finding common tool kits in Africa and the Americas is not hard evidence and direct proof of contact. Moreover, since the only place these people could have come from during the Ice Age was Africa proves the contact.

Dr.Nieda Guidon hypothesized that man appeared in Brazil 100, 000 years ago from Africa (NYT, 2015). She illustrated that her hypothesis was confirmed by 1) structures to make fire, i.e. hearths, 2) stone tools and charcoal was found in the hearths that date back 100kya, 3) the Ice Age prevented people from reaching Brazil from Asia, while the winds and currents would have carried people directly from Africa
to Brazil (NYT, 2015). The charcoal and tools at Pedra Furada were found in hearths, sites of proposed human habitation.

If the charcoal and tools were made naturally the entire site would have been burned,
instead of just artifacts found in the hearths. We can accept Dr.Nieda Guidon hypothesis because it is normal science to use charcoal recovered from hearths to date a human habitation site (Guidon and Arnoud, 1991; Guidon and Delibris, 1986, Guidon et al., 1996; NYT, 2015).

Secondly, Fire unless the result of lightening is produced by man. The evidence that fire existed in Brazil 65kya is an indication that man was at the site 65, 000 years ago, since researchers found charcoal, which is the
result of fire making (NYT, 2015).

Cited articles can be found in this paper: THE PALEOAMERICANS CAME FROM AFRICA https://www.academia.edu/17137182/THE_PALEOAMERICANS_CAME_FROM_AFRICA
.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Thereal
Member
Member # 22452

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Thereal     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Doug what's so difficult to say that people came to the Americas from Africa? Mike and Mr winter has show Africans had the boat technologies,outside of beringia africas is closer to the america than any island in the pacific, whites like to label certain black types as coming to there current location because of slavery,people have a hard time imagining black Africans in the northern part of Africa let alone Europe that wasn't the result of some ancient slave trade. This isn't proof but blacks could not fakes these things if they weren't there. https://youtu.be/Be3NramkXw0
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Thereal:
Doug what's so difficult to say that people came to the Americas from Africa? Mike and Mr winter has show Africans had the boat technologies,outside of beringia africas is closer to the america than any island in the pacific, whites like to label certain black types as coming to there current location because of slavery,people have a hard time imagining black Africans in the northern part of Africa let alone Europe that wasn't the result of some ancient slave trade. This isn't proof but blacks could not fakes these things if they weren't there. https://youtu.be/Be3NramkXw0

There is a difference between saying something and proving it with hard facts. As I said, people have been saying this for a long time but have yet to provide hard facts. This even goes back to Ivan Van Sertima and the Olmecs. The only hard evidence he had was the Olmec stone heads, but to date nobody has provided any actual hard evidence of African navigation to the Americas, even though some admit that it is possible.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Thereal
Member
Member # 22452

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Thereal     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I get what you're saying my issue is timeframe as Africa is the base of humanity,I have no problem if newer evidence disproves that but articles posted here were saying that the Americas weren't navigable at a certain point in the north and there is evidence for habitation before that ,it terms of proximity Africa is closer assuming there were no chains of island now submerged in the Pacific that could reduce travel time directly through the ocean to the Americas as mike has suggest that people could've come by way of the Antarctic to the southern tipo of the americas.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Mitochondrial portrait of the Cabo Verde archipelago: the Senegambian
outpost of Atlantic slave trade
A. BREHM", L. PEREIRA

The Portuguese discovered the Cabo Verde islands in 1460±1462, although there have been
sporadic reports that at least the island of Sal (referred to as Aulil or Ulil) was already known
to the Moors, and perhaps also to Wolof, Serer, and Lebu fishermen
who took salt from there
(Carreira, 1983). In any case, the islands were uninhabited and the ®rst settlement occurred in
Santiago in 1461±1462 and then in the nearby island of Fogo.

--------------------
Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Thereal:
I get what you're saying my issue is timeframe as Africa is the base of humanity,I have no problem if newer evidence disproves that but articles posted here were saying that the Americas weren't navigable at a certain point in the north and there is evidence for habitation before that ,it terms of proximity Africa is closer assuming there were no chains of island now submerged in the Pacific that could reduce travel time directly through the ocean to the Americas as mike has suggest that people could've come by way of the Antarctic to the southern tipo of the americas.

Around 25kya Africans (probably the Khoisan) introduced the Salutrean culture to North America. As you can see from the map below the ice sheet kept Eurasians from sailing or making overland migrations to North America.
.

 -
.

People could have come from Antarctica, but you have to ask yourself how did people get there since the South Pole was not connected to Africa or Australia. Until the ice melts we will never really know what culture existed in Antarctica.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:
Originally posted by Thereal:
Doug what's so difficult to say that people came to the Americas from Africa? Mike and Mr winter has show Africans had the boat technologies,outside of beringia africas is closer to the america than any island in the pacific, whites like to label certain black types as coming to there current location because of slavery,people have a hard time imagining black Africans in the northern part of Africa let alone Europe that wasn't the result of some ancient slave trade. This isn't proof but blacks could not fakes these things if they weren't there. https://youtu.be/Be3NramkXw0

There is a difference between saying something and proving it with hard facts. As I said, people have been saying this for a long time but have yet to provide hard facts. This even goes back to Ivan Van Sertima and the Olmecs. The only hard evidence he had was the Olmec stone heads, but to date nobody has provided any actual hard evidence of African navigation to the Americas, even though some admit that it is possible.
It is sad you have not paid any attention to my post on the Olmecs. If you did, you would know that I have presented hard evidence on the African origin of the Olmecs. This evidence includes textual evidence and archaeological evidence.

There is no evidence that the Olmec existed in Mexico before 1200-1100 BC. Izapa Stela #5 tells the story of the Olmec, the Xi people migration to Mexico from Africa.

 -

The archaeological evidence suggest that the Olmec "miraculously appear on American soil".

Some researchers claim that I am wrongly ruling out an “indigenous revolution” for the origin of the Olmec civilization. This is their opinion—the archaeological evidence, not I, suggest that the founders of the Olmec civilization were not “indigenous” people.


In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement”Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects”.

M. Coe, writing in Regional Perspective on the Olmecs (1989), (ed.) by Sharer and Grove, observed that “ on the contrary, the evidence although negative, is that the Olmec style of art, and Olmec engineering ability suddenly appeared full fledged from about 1200 BC”.

Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J.E. Cark and M.E. Pye,makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of the Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become Olmecs, or to become like the Olmecs” (p.234). Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries” (pp.245-46).

Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs:America’s first civilization (2005), wrote “ The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue” (p.25).

Pool (17-18), in Olmec Archaeology and early MesoAmerica (2007), argues that continuity exist between the Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico “[even]though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin for Olmec culture (Diehl & Coe 1995:150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32; Coe and Diehl 1980a:150)”.

Pool admits (p.95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo, who reported dramatic change in ceramic type and argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p.150).”


The evidence presented by these authors make it clear that the Olmec introduced a unique culture to Mesoamerica that was adopted by the Mesoamericans. As these statements make it clear that was no continuity between pre-Olmec cultures and the Olmec culture.

The Olmec came from Saharan Africa.
They spoke a Mande language. Evidence of this connection comes from the fact:

1) both groups used jade (Amazonite) to make their tools. Amazonite was used in Saharan Africa
 -

It was found at many sites in the ancient Sahara by archaeologists from the University of Chicago led by Soreno See:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2515196/pdf/pone.0002995.pdf

They made adzes and pendants to name a few items in amazonite.


2) both groups made large stone heads. Here is an African head dating back to the same period.

 -

3) The Mande came to Mexico in boats from the Sahara down the ancient Niger River that formerly emptied in the Sahara or they could have made their way to the Atlantic Ocean down the Senegal River.

 -

4) The Olmec writing points back to a Mande origin in Africa.

 -

.
 -

5) Olmec skeletons that are African.

6) Similar white, and red-and-black pottery.

 -

7) Introduction of the 13 month 20 day calendar.

8) Mayan adoption of the Mande term for writing.

9)Mande religious and culture terms adopted by Mayan people.

. Check out my video on the name for the Olmecs: Xi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EbtykVTwPg


As a result, there is considerable hard evidence of an African origin of the Olmecs. Just admit it. Until a white man claims the Olmecs were Africans you will never accept such a proposition made by an Afro=American.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Black Maya may have traded with Egypt--but they did not speak Egyptian.

Clyde Winters and Leo Wiener also suggested that the Mayan language had many Mande loanwords.

 -


.
 -

The first researcher to recognize that the Olmec writing was Mande was Leo Wiener, in Africa and the discovery of America. He recognized that the writing on the Tuxtla statuette was written in Mande characters.

Here we have three examples of Mande writing the first picture is writing from a modern site.

Picture 2 is writing on the Tuxtla statuette from Mexico.

Picture 3 writing during the chariot age.

Note the symbol made up of squares with dots inside.

.


 -


 -

 -
Mojarra Stela
.

.
 -

.

.

 -

Tuxtla Statuette

.


Check out these videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pawacnH347o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFaTLi9hqaM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Inscriptions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9reWNcVQVEw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAHP_wMy-_E


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHH6nv6SWLk


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Enjoy

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
After 800 BC the Olmec entered Western mexico. At this time it appears that the Mokaya were “Olmecizied”. At this time we see the introduction of Olmec ceramics, culture items and writing.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the Olmec played a prominent role in the rise of Mayan civilization. In Guatemala, we find jaguar stucco masks on the pyramids of EI Mirador Structure 34, Cerros Structure 5C-2nd, E-VII Sub at Takalik Uxaxatun, and Structure 5D 22-2nd at Tikal. These jaguar masks are identical to Olmec jaguar masks: Stela C Tres Zapotes, the La Venta Sarcophagus, and Monument 15 La Venta. In this presentation, we test the hypothesis that there is a correlation between the pre-Classic Guatemalan writing and the (Epi)Olmec writing of Mexico. The purpose of this project is to compare these symbols to fully decipher the inscriptions of Guatemala, and to learn more about the religious and political system of the pre-Classic Guatemalans.

Most researchers have assumed that this pyramid was built by the Maya. Although this is the popular view, this pyramid was probably built by the Black Maya. And the Maya probably built a new pyramid over the original Olmec pyramid.

Under many pyramids found in Guatemala and Belize we find stucco-modeled jaguar pyramids. These pyramids with jaguar mask and large earrings predate all the Mayan pyramids. They are found at Uaxactun, Tikal and Cerros.


Most researchers have assumed that this pyramid was built by the Maya. Although this is the popular view, this pyramid was probably built by the Olmec. And the Maya probably built a new pyramid over the original Olmec pyramid.

Under many pyramids found in Guatemala and Belize we find stucco-modeled jaguar pyramids. These pyramids with jaguar mask and large earrings predate all the Mayan pyramids. They are found at Uaxactun, Tikal and Cerros.

 -


We see new Black civilizations rise along the Pacific coast after 500 BC. Between 500-200 BC Guatemala was a center of Black civilizations. Some of these civilization include San Bartolo, Izapa and Kaminaljuyu. The founders of these civilizations were probably the ancestors of the Black Costa Chicas the negrocostachicanos.

The Negrocostachicanos are responsible for the pre-Classic pyramids the Maya built their pyramids upon. They left us numerous inscriptions on artifacts from Izapa, San Bartolo and Kuinaljuyu they may provide us with keen insight into their history and civilization.


 -

Stone head From San Bartolo

The San Bartolo, Guatemala murals are very beautiful they were discovered by William Saturno of the University of New Hampshire. These murals were found in an unexcavated pyramid. Entering a looter’s trench Dr. Saturno dug into the pyramid and discovered the murals. Much of the mural was destroyed when the Maya built another pyramid over the original structure.

 -

King Kali

The San Bartolo pyramid has two murals. One of the murals is of a procession of people on a boat . The other mural is of King Tali, sitting on his pyramid.


 -


On the boat there are a number of figures. Moving from right to left we see four standing figures nearest the end of the boat. These figures are carrying bundles raised above their heads.

In front of these figures we see several symbols. These symbols provide context to the procession.

There are a number of female figures on the boat. The woman near the Corn God has writing symbols on their faces. The kneeling figure holding the vase on the far left side toward the end has the words gyo ti “righteous cult specialist” on her cheek.

The standing female figure in front of the last three symbols placed in front of the person carrying gifts has the words ti i “she is righteous” written on her cheek.

Another Black chiefdoms was situated at Kaminaljuyu. Mike provides an interesting monument from this site.

 -

It is clear that Blacks along the Pacific coast the Negrocostachicanos are descendants of the original Africans who lived in Mexico, Belize and Guatemala for thousands of years. The Blacks along the Gulf are mainly of African Slave origin.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is clear that Blacks along the Pacific coast the Negrocostachicanos and Garifuna are descendants of the original Africans who lived in Mexico, Belize and Guatemala for thousands of years. The Blacks along the Gulf are mainly of African Slave origin.

When the Olmec arrived in America there were already numerous Black Native American cultures in Mexico and Central America, including the Ocos, Mokaya, and Cherla. These Blacks adopted many aspects of Olmec civilization and built the first pyramids in Belize, Guatamala and Hondurus.

The ancestors of the first Mexicans were Paleoamericans and other Blacks who had been sailing to the Americas for 100,000 years; or migrated from Asia across the Beringa beginning around 12000 BC, e.g., the Pgymies or Anu people.
The original Maya as illustrated by the Ocos were Blacks. As a result, the mongoloid Maya just adopted the culture and language of the original Black Maya.

The earliest culture founded by Blacks in Mexico was the Mokaya tradition. The Mokaya tradition was situated on the Pacific coast of Mexico in the Soconusco region. Sedentary village life began as early as 2000BC. By 1700-1500 BC we see many African communities in the Mazatan region. This is called the Barra phase or Ocos complex.

I have often written about the Black Native Americans, like the Ocos, but the Olmec came directly from Africa.

The Black Costa Chicas or negrocostachicanos in a region where numerous artifacts have been found that indicate that Black cultures trives in Western Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala almost 2000 years before the Olmec sailed to mexico from Africa and landed on the Gulf coast of Mexico.

In Belize , around 2500 B.C., we see evidence of agriculture. The iconography of this period depicts Africoids. And at Izapa in 1358 B.C., astronomer-priests invented the first American calendar. In addition numerous sculptures of blacks dating to the 2nd millennium B.C, have been found at La Venta, Chiapas, Teotihuacan and Tlatilco.

 -
Chiapas Blacks


The earliest culture founded by Blacks in the Pacific coats region was the Mokaya tradition. The Mokaya tradition was situated on the Pacific coast of Mexico in the Soconusco region. Sedentary village life began as early as 2000BC. By 1700-1500 BC we see many African communities in the Mazatan region. This is called the Barra phase or Ocos complex.

During the Barra phase these Blacks built villages amd made beautiful ceramic vessels often with three legs. They also made a large number of effigy vessels.

The figurines of the Ocos are the most significant evidence for Blacks living in the area during this period. The female figurine from Aquiles Serdan is clearly that of an African woman.
 -
Ocos Female

The Blacks of the Mokaya traditions were not Olmec. The civilization of the Mokaya traditions began 700 years before the Olmec arrived in Mexico.

 -
Cherla

In most history text the Ocos are presented as the original founders of Mayan civilization. As you can see from the art they do not look like native Americans they look negro like other Africans.

The Mongoloid Mexicans do not look like the Olmecs either

 -

.
The present-day descendants of the Black Native Mexicans are the Garifuna and the Negrocostachicanos.


Mexicans who look like Africans today look this way because of admixture with African slaves since the Atlantic Slave Trade.

.
 -

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Popol Vuh, gives us insight into Mayan history.



In the Popol Vuh it is made clear that the ancestors of the Quiche Maya came from across the sea. We will use quotes from Tedlocks translation of the Popol Vuh

We shall write about this now amid the preaching of God,in Christendom now. We shall bring it out because there is no longer a place to see it, a Council Book, a place to see “The Light That Came from Beside the Sea”, the account of “Our Place in the Shadows”, a place to see “The Dawn of Life”……(p.63).

The ancestors of the Maya came from east. “…[b]the first people came from beside the sea, from the east. They came here in ancient times. When they died they were very old”
(p.175).

Claiming that the nacestors came from the East is very important. East of the Maya, would be the Gulf Region where the Mande/Olmec people settled and founded the Olmec civilization.

You guys, in your racism assume that their were no Blacks among the Maya. This is a false view. The Popol Vuh notes that: They didn’t know where they were going. They did this for a long time, when they were there in the grasslands:the black people, the white people, people of many faces, people of many languages, uncertain there at the edge of the sky (pp.149-150).

The Blacks introduced civilization among the Maya. In the Popol Vuh, it is noted that And then the boys made fire with drill and rosted, the bird over the fire. And they coated one of the birds with plaster, they put gypsum on it (p.86).


 -



It is interesting to note that the boys drilling are depicted as Blacks in the Dresden and Tro-Cotesianus Codexes.

As a result, the color Black and Black individuals were recognized as important in Mayan culture. The major Black gods were God C, Xaman and Ekchuah. God C is personification of the concept of sacreness. It has the phonetic value of ku or ch’in deity or sacreness. The Mayan term for deity/god is of Mande Olmec origin:

  • Maya ……..English………Mande

    Kin………….day…………..kene

    K’u,ku……..sacre,god………Ku

This is another indication of the Olmec origin of Mayan civilization.

The jaguar played an important role in Mayan society as it did in Africa. The jaguar pelt or cushion was the symbol of the ‘enthroned lord’. This is why we see the jaguar pelt around the neck of the Black royal represented in the Chama vase.

Blacks also introduced writing and trade among the Maya. The usual Mayan term for black is ’Ek’. Thus the merchant god signified by the back pack staff and etc was called Ekchuah. Thus we see these Blacks, gods etc. represented in many Mayan Codexes.
.

 -
God C

.
The fact is that there were Black Maya, and that these Blacks played an important role in Mayan society.

.

Many pyramids are probably of Black Mayan origin. This is evident in the dragon motifs.

 -

This Olmec motif is found on pyramids that were covered over by later Mayan pyramids. These subpyramids were probably built by the Olmec.

.

 -

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A good example of the Architectural skill and innovations of the First Nation Blacks is the pyramidal complex at Xultun. These Blacks left evidence of their identity in the architectural workroom.


The Xultun pyramidal complex shows a variety of architectural styles and buildings

 -

The First Nation Blacks in Mexico had a right to create their own architectural style just like other Blacks in Africa who developed different pyramidial styles.

The most exciting archaeological fine has to be the Xultun murals. The xultun murals depict not only Black Mayan royalty—but also Mayan commoners and elites.


Below we see some Black atrchitects and engineers that built the Xultun pyramids.
 -


These colorful llustrations are by Dr. by Heather Hurst. The illustrations of Dr. Hurst, of the Xultun figures show that the Black people there dressed in bright colors and wore various scarves and other hats to cover their hair/heads.

 -

Below are the architects and engineers that built Xultun

 -


The Stylized reproduction of Black Mexicans from the Bonampak Murals at Chiapas, Mexico are also colorful.

 -

The colorful outfits of the Latin Americans continue to be worn today.

 -

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doug M
Member
Member # 7650

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doug M     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Black Maya may have traded with Egypt--but they did not speak Egyptian.

Clyde Winters and Leo Wiener also suggested that the Mayan language had many Mande loanwords.

 -


.
 -

The first researcher to recognize that the Olmec writing was Mande was Leo Wiener, in Africa and the discovery of America. He recognized that the writing on the Tuxtla statuette was written in Mande characters.

Here we have three examples of Mande writing the first picture is writing from a modern site.

Picture 2 is writing on the Tuxtla statuette from Mexico.

Picture 3 writing during the chariot age.

Note the symbol made up of squares with dots inside.

.


 -


 -

 -
Mojarra Stela
.

.
 -

.

.

 -

Tuxtla Statuette

.


Check out these videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pawacnH347o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFaTLi9hqaM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Inscriptions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9reWNcVQVEw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAHP_wMy-_E


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHH6nv6SWLk


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Enjoy

When I say hard evidence though I mean actual boats and remains that are 100,000 years old.

Remember you said the Africans got there 100,000 years ago. Olmecs aren't the same population. Where is the direct evidence for that or any other direct migration from Africa since then?

Ivan Van Sertima pretty much covered the Olmecs in his work and I don't disagree with that. However, there is still no hard evidence for that either in terms of skeletons or boats.

We know black natives have always been in Central and South America. The question is whether these people came from the Pacific, other parts of South Asia or Africa and when.

Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There is a difference between evidence and proof in science. Evidence is equivocal, proof isn't.

Clyde, you kinda have to know the basics at this point.

Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Black Maya may have traded with Egypt--but they did not speak Egyptian.

Clyde Winters and Leo Wiener also suggested that the Mayan language had many Mande loanwords.

 -


.
 -

The first researcher to recognize that the Olmec writing was Mande was Leo Wiener, in Africa and the discovery of America. He recognized that the writing on the Tuxtla statuette was written in Mande characters.

Here we have three examples of Mande writing the first picture is writing from a modern site.

Picture 2 is writing on the Tuxtla statuette from Mexico.

Picture 3 writing during the chariot age.

Note the symbol made up of squares with dots inside.

.


 -


 -

 -
Mojarra Stela
.

.
 -

.

.

 -

Tuxtla Statuette

.


Check out these videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pawacnH347o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFaTLi9hqaM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Inscriptions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9reWNcVQVEw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAHP_wMy-_E


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHH6nv6SWLk


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Enjoy

When I say hard evidence though I mean actual boats and remains that are 100,000 years old.

Remember you said the Africans got there 100,000 years ago. Olmecs aren't the same population. Where is the direct evidence for that or any other direct migration from Africa since then?

Ivan Van Sertima pretty much covered the Olmecs in his work and I don't disagree with that. However, there is still no hard evidence for that either in terms of skeletons or boats.

We know black natives have always been in Central and South America. The question is whether these people came from the Pacific, other parts of South Asia or Africa and when.

Ivan did not fully cover the Olmecs, he only talked about the heads and thought they were Nubians.

My research has taken evidence of African origin of the Olmecs further by fully deciphering their language; and bi-lingual Olmec-Mayan texts and illustrating their creation of the Meso-American calendar. In addition, while Ivan could only talk about the braids on the Olmec heads I have been able to read their names and even point out the centers were some of the Olmec Kings ruled as in the case of Bi-Po Po; and the Olmec religion.

Dr.Nieda Guidon dating of human population in Brazil 100,000 years ago based on ancient fire and tool making is enough evidence for me. The fact that you can not walk across the Atlantic, is clearly evidence these Africans had boats.

Finally, I doubt if a wooden boat 100kya old would survive the decades of being in the ground. To be serious, we don't even have Columbus' Nina and Pinta ,ships the Spanish sailed to America, but because we find whites here we know they sailed from Europe to America in boats, because they couldn't walk here.

Granted we don't have any skeletons that are 100kya old--but we do have the Paleoamerican skeletons dating back 8-13kya years ago.

In addition, there are also the Salutrean tool kits. The Salutrean tool kit originated in South Africa, and was later taken to Iberia and the Americas.

Stanford and Bradley, in Across Atlantic Ice:The Origin of America's Clovis Culture, claim that there is no archaeological evidence that situate the Clovis people in Siberia. Stanford and Bradley maintain that sites dating between 25, 000-13000 years ago, namely the offshore Cinmar site, Meadowcroft Rock Shelter in Pennsylvania, Oyster Cove on the Chesapeake Bay,Cactus Hill in Virginia, and the Miles Point site have tool kits that resemble Solutrean tools,

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Evidence is not equivocal. Evidence is the matter that both validates and invalidates a theory. In science, proof does not exist. Proof only exist in a court of law, where a Judge determines what is or what is not proof.

Research is the foundation of good science, or knowing in general. There are four methods of 1) Method of tenacity (one holds firmly to the truth, because "they know it" to be true); 2) method of authority (the method of established belief, i.e., the Bible or the "experts" says it, it is so); 3) method of intuition (the method where a proposition agrees with reason, but not necessarily with experience); and 4) the method of science (the method of attaining knowledge which calls for self-correction).

To explain Africans in ancient America, I use the scientific method which calls for hypothesis testing, not only supported by experimentation, but also that of alternative plausible hypotheses that, may place doubt on the original hypothesis.

The aim of science is theory construction (F.N. Kirlinger, Foundations of behavior research, (1986) pp.6-10; R. Braithwaite, Scientific explanation, (1955) pp.1-10). A theory is a set of interrelated constructs, propositions and definitions, that provide a systematic understanding of phenomena by outlining relations among a group of variables that explain and predict phenomena.

Scientific inquiry involves issues of theory construction, control and experimentation. Scientific knowledge must rest on testing, rather than mere induction which can be defined as inferences of laws and generalizations, derived from observation.

Karl Popper in The Logic of Scientific Discovery, rejects this form of logical validity based solely on inference and conjecture (pp. 33-65). Popper maintains that confirmation in science, is arrived at through falsification.

Therefore to confirm a theory in science one test the theory through rigorous attempts at falsification. In falsification the researcher uses cultural, linguistic, anthropological and historical evidence to invalidate a proposed theory. If a theory can not be falsified through the variables (evidenc) associated with the theory it is confirmed. It can only be disconfirmed when new generalizations (based on evidence) associated with the original theory fail to survive attempts at falsification.

In science you either confirm, or disconfirm a theory. A valid theory has abundant evidence supporting that theory, and remains valid as long as it is not disconfirmed by a researcher who provides counter evidence, that nullifies the evidence which supported the original theory.

In short, science centers on conjecture and refutations. One makes a theory and provides evidence to support the theory. The more evidence you present in support of a theory confirms the validity of your hypothesis. If, another researcher presents more evidence that falsifies the theory, the theory must be rejected.

Thusly evidence is not equivocal. Evidence will determine both the validity and lack of validity for a theory.
.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doug M:
When I say hard evidence though I mean actual boats and remains that are 100,000 years old.

Remember you said the Africans got there 100,000 years ago. Olmecs aren't the same population. Where is the direct evidence for that or any other direct migration from Africa since then?

Ivan Van Sertima pretty much covered the Olmecs in his work and I don't disagree with that. However, there is still no hard evidence for that either in terms of skeletons or boats.

We know black natives have always been in Central and South America. The question is whether these people came from the Pacific, other parts of South Asia or Africa and when.

Where have you been? I have posted the skeletal evidence of Africans several times in the past 5 years.
Ivan van Sertima told us about the work Dr. Wiercinski who examined many Olmec skeletons. Dr. Wiercinski (1972) claims that the some of the Olmecs were of African origin. He supports this claim with skeletal evidence from several Olmec sites where he found skeletons that were analogous to the West African type black. Wiercinski discovered that 13.5 percent of the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4.5 percent of the skeletons from Cerro de las Mesas were Africoid (Rensberger,1988; Wiercinski, 1972; Wiercinski & Jairazbhoy 1975).

Diehl and Coe (1995, 12) of Harvard University have made it clear that until a skeleton of an African is found on an Olmec site he will not accept the art evidence that the were Africans among the Olmecs. This is rather surprising because Constance Irwin and Dr. Wiercinski (1972) have both reported that skeletal remains of Africans have been found in Mexico. Constance Irwin, in Fair Gods and Stone Faces, says that anthropologist see "distinct signs of Negroid ancestry in many a New World skull...."

Dr. Wiercinski (1972) claims that some of the Olmecs were of African origin. He supports this claim with skeletal evidence from several Olmec sites where he found skeletons that were analogous to the West African type black. Many Olmec skulls show cranial deformations (Pailles, 1980), yet Wiercinski (1972b) was able to determine the ethnic origins of the Olmecs. Marquez (1956, 179-80) made it clear that a common trait of the African skulls found in Mexico include marked prognathousness ,prominent cheek bones are also mentioned. Fronto-occipital deformation among the Olmec is not surprising because cranial deformations was common among the Mande speaking people until fairly recently (Desplanges, 1906).


To determine the racial heritage of the ancient Olmecs, Dr. Wiercinski (1972b) used classic diagnostic traits determined by craniometric and cranioscopic methods. These measurements were then compared to a series of three crania sets from Poland, Mongolia and Uganda to represent the three racial categories of mankind.
 -
In Table 1, we have the racial composition of the Olmec skulls. The only European type recorded in this table is the Alpine group which represents only 1.9 percent of the crania from Tlatilco.

The other alleged "white" crania from Wiercinski's typology of Olmec crania, represent the Dongolan (19.2 percent), Armenoid (7.7 percent), Armenoid-Bushman (3.9 percent) and Anatolian (3.9 percent). The Dongolan, Anatolian and Armenoid terms are euphemisms for the so-called "Brown Race" "Dynastic Race", "Hamitic Race",and etc., which racist Europeans claimed were the founders of civilization in Africa.


 -

In Table 2, we record the racial composition of the Olmec according to the Wiercinski (1972b) study. The races recorded in this table are based on the Polish Comparative-Morphological School (PCMS). The PCMS terms are misleading. As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks. This is obvious when we look at the iconographic and sculptural evidence used by Wiercinski (1972b) to support his conclusions.

Wiercinski (1972b) compared the physiognomy of the Olmecs to corresponding examples of Olmec sculptures and bas-reliefs on the stelas. For example, Wiercinski (1972b, p.160) makes it clear that the clossal Olmec heads represent the Dongolan type. It is interesting to note that the emperical frequencies of the Dongolan type at Tlatilco is .231, this was more than twice as high as Wiercinski's theorectical figure of .101, for the presence of Dongolans at Tlatilco.

The other possible African type found at Tlatilco and Cerro were the Laponoid group. The Laponoid group represents the Austroloid-Melanesian type of (Negro) Pacific Islander, not the Mongolian type. If we add together the following percent of the Olmecs represented in Table 2, by the Laponoid (21.2%), Equatorial (13.5), and Armenoid (18.3) groups we can assume that at least 53 percent of the Olmecs at Tlatilco were Africans or Blacks. Using the same figures recorded in Table 2 for Cerro,we observe that 40.8 percent of these Olmecs would have been classified as Black if they lived in contemporary America.
Below are the racial types identified by Wiercinski:

Equatorial Type
 -


Dongolan Type
 -

 -


Sub-Pacific and Bushmanoid-Armenoid

 -

Anatolian

 -

Rossum (1996) has criticied the work of Wiercinski because he found that not only blacks, but whites were also present in ancient America. To support this view he (1) claims that Wiercinski was wrong because he found that Negro/Black people lived in Shang China, and 2) that he compared ancient skeletons to modern Old World people.

First, it was not surprising that Wiercinski found affinities between African and ancient Chinese populations, because everyone knows that many Negro/African /Oceanic skeletons (referred to as Loponoid by the Polish school) have been found in ancient China see: Kwang-chih Chang The Archaeology of ancient China (1976,1977, p.76,1987, pp.64,68). These Blacks were spread throughout Kwangsi, Kwantung, Szechwan, Yunnan and Pearl River delta.

Skeletons from Liu-Chiang and Dawenkou, early Neolithic sites found in China, were also Negro. Moreover, the Dawenkou skeletons show skull deformation and extraction of teeth customs, analogous to customs among Blacks in Polynesia and Africa.

Secondly, Rossum argues that Wiercinski was wrong about Blacks in ancient America because a comparison of modern native American skeletal material and the ancient Olmec skeletal material indicate no admixture. The study of Vargas and Rossum are flawed. They are flawed because the skeletal reference collection they used in their comparison of Olmec skeletal remains and modern Amerindian propulations because the Mexicans have been mixing with African and European populations since the 1500's. This has left many components of these Old World people within and among Mexican Amerindians.

The iconography of the classic Olmec and Mayan civilization show no correspondence in facial features. But many contemporary Maya and other Amerind groups show African characteristics and DNA. Underhill, et al (1996) found that the Mayan people have an African Y chromosome. This would explain the "puffy" faces of contemporary Amerinds, which are incongruent with the Mayan type associated with classic Mayan sculptures and stelas.

Wiercinski on the otherhand, compared his SRC to an unmixed European and African sample. This comparison avoided the use of skeletal material that is clearly mixed with Africans and Europeans, in much the same way as the Afro-American people he discussed in his essay who have acquired "white" features since mixing with whites due to the slave trade.

A. von Wuthenau (1980), and Wiercinski (1972b) highlight the numerous art pieces depicting the African or Black variety which made up the Olmec people. This re-anlysis of the Olmec skeletal meterial from Tlatilco and Cerro, which correctly identifies Armenoid, Dongolan and Loponoid as euphmisms for "Negro" make it clear that a substantial number of the Olmecs were Blacks support the art evidence and writing which point to an African origin for Olmec civilization.

In conclusion, the Olmec people were called Xi. They did not speak a Mixe-Zoque language they spoke a Mande language, which is the substratum language for many Mexican languages.

The Olmec came from Saharan Africa 3200 years ago.They came in boats which are depicted in the Izapa Stela no.5, in twelve migratory waves. These Proto-Olmecs belonged to seven clans which served as the base for the Olmec people.

Physical anthropologist use many terms to refer to the African type represented by Olmec skeletal remains including Armenoid, Dongolan, Loponoid and Equatorial. The evidence of African skeletons found at many Olmec sites, and their trading partners from the Old World found by Dr. Andrzej Wiercinski prove the cosmopolitan nature of Olmec society. This skeletal evidence explains the discovery of many African tribes in Mexico and Central America when Columbus discovered the Americas (de Quatrefages, 1836).

The skeletal material from Tlatilco and Cerro de las Mesas and evidence that the Olmecs used an African writing to inscribe their monuments and artifacts, make it clear that Africans were a predominant part of the Olmec population. These Olmecs constructed complex pyramids and large sculptured monuments weighing tons. The Maya during the Pre-Classic period built pyramids over the Olmec pyramids to disguise the Olmec origin of these pyramids.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Clyde why do you post the same thing dozens of times, year after year?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Evidence is not equivocal. Evidence is the matter that both validates and invalidates a theory. In science, proof does not exist. Proof only exist in a court of law, where a Judge determines what is or what is not proof.

Research is the foundation of good science, or knowing in general. There are four methods of 1) Method of tenacity (one holds firmly to the truth, because "they know it" to be true); 2) method of authority (the method of established belief, i.e., the Bible or the "experts" says it, it is so); 3) method of intuition (the method where a proposition agrees with reason, but not necessarily with experience); and 4) the method of science (the method of attaining knowledge which calls for self-correction).

To explain Africans in ancient America, I use the scientific method which calls for hypothesis testing, not only supported by experimentation, but also that of alternative plausible hypotheses that, may place doubt on the original hypothesis.

The aim of science is theory construction (F.N. Kirlinger, Foundations of behavior research, (1986) pp.6-10; R. Braithwaite, Scientific explanation, (1955) pp.1-10). A theory is a set of interrelated constructs, propositions and definitions, that provide a systematic understanding of phenomena by outlining relations among a group of variables that explain and predict phenomena.

Scientific inquiry involves issues of theory construction, control and experimentation. Scientific knowledge must rest on testing, rather than mere induction which can be defined as inferences of laws and generalizations, derived from observation.

Karl Popper in The Logic of Scientific Discovery, rejects this form of logical validity based solely on inference and conjecture (pp. 33-65). Popper maintains that confirmation in science, is arrived at through falsification.

Therefore to confirm a theory in science one test the theory through rigorous attempts at falsification. In falsification the researcher uses cultural, linguistic, anthropological and historical evidence to invalidate a proposed theory. If a theory can not be falsified through the variables (evidenc) associated with the theory it is confirmed. It can only be disconfirmed when new generalizations (based on evidence) associated with the original theory fail to survive attempts at falsification.

In science you either confirm, or disconfirm a theory. A valid theory has abundant evidence supporting that theory, and remains valid as long as it is not disconfirmed by a researcher who provides counter evidence, that nullifies the evidence which supported the original theory.

In short, science centers on conjecture and refutations. One makes a theory and provides evidence to support the theory. The more evidence you present in support of a theory confirms the validity of your hypothesis. If, another researcher presents more evidence that falsifies the theory, the theory must be rejected.

Thusly evidence is not equivocal. Evidence will determine both the validity and lack of validity for a theory.
.

Not all evidence is created equal. Lines of evidence can be reworked to fit competing theories (something you yourself admit in this post), making them equivocal. There is nothing in this thread as conclusive as, say, oxygen, carbon or other isotope signatures that narrow things down to recent African migration. Evidence of that nature one would rightly call proof.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The term e·quiv·o·cal means "open to more than one interpretation; ambiguous".

Evidence used to support a theory is not "open to more than one interpretation". It is not open to more than one interpretation because the evidence you put forward in support of a theory is germane to the hypothesis you have proposed.

Theory: An explanation of a phenomenon confirmed through observation and experimentation.

A well known theory is the big bang theory that postulates that the universe began almost 14 billion years ago with a massive expansion event, it remains a theory because the experiments n relation to this theory fail to have the same result, and can not really be proven.

The theory of evolution remains a theory because we have failed to find a missing link, or observe the evolution of a human being from a fish into a mammal, then ape and finally man.[/b]

Scientific Law: An explanation of phenomena confirmed through repeated experimental observations that have the same results and implies that there is a causal relationship involving its elements.

One scientific law is E = mc²; this is a specific statement based on empirical data. Repeated experiments confirm that E = mc², is the speed of light in a vacuum.

There is evidence presented for both theories and scientific law, but a theory can only become a law when repeated experiments confirm the evidence (variables) used in support of a theory.

this is why the evidence (variables) associated with a theory is not equivocal.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swenet
Member
Member # 17303

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Swenet     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Clyde, your whole debate with Doug shows that evidence is not just equivocal, but inherently so. You both look at the same data of early settlement but don't agree on what it means. Hence, your data is open to more than one interpretation.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is time we take a serious look at the nautical history of African people. The idea that the first civilizations in Africa were solely hunter-gather without boat technology is groundless. We have to move away from European ideas about the origins of sailing and boat technology.

The varied style of crafts depicted in the Sahara indicate that Africans made seacraft that was capable of traveling in rough waters and in the Ocean. They would have needed these sailing craft to trade and communicate with people living along these gigantic lakes.


 -


Africans probably developed their nautical skill sailing the former Megalakes that existed in Africa for 100’s of years. Look at this map of the Mega lakes that formerly existed in Africa.
.

 -


.

The lakes in Africa were thousands of miles long. Mega Chad was a freshwater lake in Africa covering 139,000 sq miles (360,000 sq km) . Lake Chad formerly emptied in the Atlantic Ocean.
The map of MegaLake Chad and MegaLake Congo make it clear that Africans could sail all the way from South Africa up to North Africa. From here they could have sailed up to the Mediterranean Sea.

The nautical skills developed by Africans prior to 130kya would explain their ability to navigate and sail the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea.

The weather on these inland seas given the size of the lakes would have made conditions similar to what sailors would have experienced sailing in the Ocean. Moreover sailing these Lakes would have given them valuable experience, that would have allowed them to sail the open seas.

 -

Moreover we find that by 100kya African tool kits appear in Brazil; and 130k year old African tools on the island of Crete. This archaeological evidence indicates that Africans were sailing great distances at a time we believe that AMH were simply gathering seeds and berries to eat—instead of fishing for supplemental source of food.

.

 -

.

The discovery of butchered Mastodons in California provides additional support for an early migration of Africans out of Africa to the rest of the world. Travel from Africa to the Americas would have been easy. Whereas a voyage to the Americas was only 1700 miles, this was nothing compared to sailing MegaLake Chad which was over 130k plus sq. miles.

The presence of humans in California and Crete around 130kya indicates that Africans were exiting Africa at this time to the Americas and Europe. It suggest that the first OOA events were focused on the West, instead of the eastern parts of the world.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3