Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Topic: europeans the first americans? Posted: 27-May-2009 at 21:57 |
have seen two programmes on history channel first was on the remains of 2 white men found in texas that were 2000 years old. second was on a tribe from france who crossed to the states and colonised the west coast. could it be this tribe co-exsisted with , were assimilated by or killed by the indians as they came south from alaska
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-May-2009 at 22:26 |
Answer: NOOOOO
|
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-May-2009 at 22:50 |
why not
|
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-May-2009 at 22:52 |
apparently this tribe brought with it techniques in spear making ch they shared with the indians they met which enabled the indians to kill the large predetors that lived there at the time, thus allowing them to move south
|
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-May-2009 at 23:04 |
conerning the two remains found in texas these were found on indian land and the indians therefore went to court obtained the remains and then destroyed them. i actually saw a third programme that showed the first people in south america came from australia and were killed by the indians when they moved south, im not indian bashing here as i love indian history and culture im just trying to find out parts of human history that might have been missed
|
|
Chookie
Pretorian
Joined: 14-Apr-2008
Location: Alba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 171
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-May-2009 at 23:11 |
Originally posted by hiddenhistory
have seen two programmes on history channel first was on the remains of 2 white men found in texas that were 2000 years old. second was on a tribe from france who crossed to the states and colonised the west coast. |
This tribe from France would most likely have been the Solutrians, but they weren't from France. They existed around 30,000BC - France didn't. On the other hand I've seen (can't remember where) references to Causcasoid skeletons in America which have been carbon dated to around 9,000BC (plus or minus 10%)
|
For money you did what guns could not do.........
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-May-2009 at 23:35 |
Originally posted by hiddenhistory
why not |
You can't swim in freezing seas. Besides, there is not a single archaeological evidence and not evidence of "euro genetics" in modern Amerindians, either
|
|
edgewaters
Sultan
Snake in the Grass-Banned
Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-May-2009 at 07:17 |
All the discoveries of "Caucasian skeletons" in the Americas found so far have been shown to be false, although it hasn't stopped some fringe types from continuing the claim. There has been a very long history of attempts to deny that the inhabitants of the Western Hemisphere could have produced the advanced civilizations they did by ascribing these things to the influence of European or Middle Eastern cultures. Lost tribes of Israel, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Celts, etc - anyone but Siberian migrants / native Americans. A local origin for these civilizations just isn't sexy enough for some, it seems. The Solutrians are probably the most empirical of these claims. It's based on a style of flaked stone points that, in Eurasia, was unique to the Solutrian culture of western Europe (France) but shows similarity to Clovis stone points in the Americas. This is pretty thin evidence for any sort of contact, though. Isolated groups came up with similar techniques all the time. Ground edges on stone tools, for instance, were first developed by Australian aboriginals who were relatively isolated at the time - but it subsequently appears in scattered locations around the world, including, for instance, the Natufian culture of the Neolithic Levant (Israel/Palestine). I doubt it was colonized by Australian aboriginals! The timeline for the Solutrian theory doesn't really work out all that well, either. The Solutrian culture in Europe existed from 21000 to 17000 years BP. It had disappeared entirely by 15000 years BP. The Clovis tools - the stone points in the Americas that resemble Solutrian points - hadn't started to be manufactured until about 13000 years BP, two thousand years after the Solutrians had disappeared and fully four thousand years since it had been the dominant style of stone flaking in the areas where it is found. Unless they spent a few thousand years in crossing over (maybe they froze on the way and thawed out on the other side!), it doesn't make much sense.
Edited by edgewaters - 28-May-2009 at 07:32
|
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-May-2009 at 11:19 |
its true you cant swim in frezzing seas, however the soulturans were considered the most in ventive tribe and at that time the ice packs would have been far enough south to enable then to cross in small boats that they possessed.
|
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-May-2009 at 11:25 |
perhaps the lack of evidence is due to the fact that finding small spear pionts from 15,000 years ago is difficult. it does not mean that they do or did not exsist. what about the viking remains in newfoundland. these could easily have been missed so how much harder to find a spear piont from 14,000 years earlier. have you seen the programme it also indicated dna evidence. im not a fantasy type person who believes in atlantis etc but i think this subject deserves attention
|
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-May-2009 at 11:28 |
no im sure the two skulls were 2000 years old the remains of australian aboringines were much older. perhaps someone else has seen these programmes
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-May-2009 at 14:17 |
I don't know what is the desperation of the Europeans to robb the heritage of Native Americans.
It is not enough the Louvre? Calculus? Bach music?
The motivation behind the Solutrian and other wild explanations by self proclaimed "experts" it is the same: awake the sense of awe of low educated people; sale a lot of books and racism.
These kind of europeans simple believe Amerindians are inferior and needed "masters" to teach them. They are of the same school of Heyerdhal and Hitler; still looking for the Ark of the Covenants.
|
|
Jams
Consul
Suspended
Joined: 06-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 365
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-May-2009 at 14:49 |
Originally posted by edgewaters
The timeline for the Solutrian theory doesn't really work out all that well, either. The Solutrian culture in Europe existed from 21000 to 17000 years BP. It had disappeared entirely by 15000 years BP. The Clovis tools - the stone points in the Americas that resemble Solutrian points - hadn't started to be manufactured until about 13000 years BP, two thousand years after the Solutrians had disappeared and fully four thousand years since it had been the dominant style of stone flaking in the areas where it is found. Unless they spent a few thousand years in crossing over (maybe they froze on the way and thawed out on the other side!), it doesn't make much sense. |
I think that is a good point. Anyway, we don't know what kind of technique the Siberian population, who was the Native Americans-to-be, used. Maybe they just had a similar technology/style, or maybe they were influenced by a similar style - although I find that hard to believe, considering the distances. Never the less, people wandered all the way from Africa to the Americas in the long term, so it's not impossible. I doubt we could even talk about "white people" at that time anyway.
Originally posted by hiddenhistory
have seen two programmes on history channel first was on the remains of 2 white men found in texas that were 2000 years old. second was on a tribe from france who crossed to the states and colonised the west coast. could it be this tribe co-exsisted with , were assimilated by or killed by the indians as they came south from alaska |
You have to be more specific than that. What is the timeframe for the latter idea? I mean, it can't be 2000 years, because the Americas was completely populated by the present peoples long before that.
Edited by Jams - 28-May-2009 at 14:53
|
|
hiddenhistory
Housecarl
Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-May-2009 at 16:43 |
im afraid you misunderstand my motivations in posting this subject. i have no desire to rob the native americans of their heritage, perhaps my title post is misleading. im sure the native americans landed in alaska first. All im saying is its possbile that other peoples may have come from other directions and this would be interesting if it was the case. anyway human history belongs to us all native american history belongs to me just as european history belongs to you. we are all human and have the right and duty to discover what our ancestors did with there lives. please stop looking at this as a rascist attack. instead it is a professional historical line of investigation. perhaps then we can make progress togethere
|
|
juzt4me
Immortal Guard
Joined: 22-Aug-2009
Location: Timmins
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Aug-2009 at 17:57 |
In fact, those are Paleo-Indians. They immigrated to the America's around 5000 B.C and brought with them the talent of spear making. They crossed through the Bering strait, but are not to be confused however with the first Americans. Those arrived somewhere near 10,000 B.C. although these are one of the many cultures on which the Americas stand on today, which is why the Americas are so culturally diversed.
|
|
Cryptic
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Aug-2009 at 20:00 |
Originally posted by juzt4me
They crossed through the Bering strait, but are not to be confused however with the first Americans. Those arrived somewhere near 10,000 B.C. |
I have seen numbers suggesting that the New World was inhabited at least 20,000 years ago. The evidence is growing that there were number of migration waves.
I think what turns people off is the use of the term "Europeans" in association with ancient America. Some people think that this implies that Europeans were the origins of Amer-indian civilizations. The truth is that the Paelo Indians from Europe were no more "European" than the Asiatic Paleo Indians were "Chinese".
Edited by Cryptic - 22-Aug-2009 at 20:01
|
|
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Apr-2010 at 19:13 |
Why all of this fuss about "origins?", why don't we first determine just when the so called "Ice Age" began and ended?
It really seems that these dates, are certainly used by many experts to make their cases pro or con some race, or tribe, etc.!
Even in my time on this planet (63years) It seems that I have seen the estimated time of the Ice Age, in America has shrunken from 100000 years to 50,000 years to as little as 8,000 years or so by some estimations!
Perhaps, with other new discoveries it might well shrink some more?
Edited by opuslola - 11-Apr-2010 at 19:25
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
|
red clay
Administrator
Tomato Master Emeritus
Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2010 at 14:44 |
There have been many glacial mins and maxs over the past 100,000 years. Your attempting to combine them into one. In the immortal words of Edwin Titchnell, last of the WVa. mountain men, "Don't work no how."
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
|
|
opuslola
Tsar
suspended
Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2010 at 16:39 |
Originally posted by red clay
There have been many glacial mins and maxs over the past 100,000 years. Your attempting to combine them into one. In the immortal words of Edwin Titchnell, last of the WVa. mountain men, "Don't work no how." |
Red Clay, I suppose the above comment was directed at my previous post? If so, I said these words concerning the age of the last Ice Age;
"Even in my time on this planet (63years) It seems that I have seen the estimated time of the Ice Age, in America has shrunken from 100000 years to 50,000 years to as little as 8,000 years or so by some estimations!
Perhaps, with other new discoveries it might well shrink some more?"
I don't see anywhere where I doubted that there were multiple Ice ages, rather I merely mentioned that science has lowered the age of the "last" big one, over 90,000 or so years in my life time!
So, in the words of Alfred T. Neuman, "Works, all time, all way!"
But, thanks for your kind attempt to help anyway!
Regards,
Edited by opuslola - 16-Oct-2010 at 16:44
|
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
|
|
Pytheus
Samurai
Joined: 10-Jul-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 135
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2010 at 20:58 |
Whether in an Ice Age or an Interglacial really doesn't matter to much when talking about the first people to arrive in the Americas.
Here's a video that pretty much answers the question
These looka bit deeper.
Edited by Pytheus - 16-Oct-2010 at 21:04
|
|