• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Did the Ancient Chinese Make Contact With Native Americans?

Free episodes:

I don't think I posted this here before - not that a single person here in this thread has indicated they have read anything in the variety of posts I have made in this thread. But UFOlogy and Chris probably actually are capable of reading so I will put it here. I have a thousand other ready made posts from every hard discipline of science ready to go when someone actually makes an argument or addresses what I post.


Many academics are unable to handle the possibility of ships that travelled the oceans as long ago as the Franchithi Caves dig that showed 13,000 B.C. community fishing fleets. It even was hard for most to accept the Kelts at the time of Caesar had this technology at that time despite the words of Caesar. Some people think knowledge once gained is never lost but that is far from true. Barry Fell was a Harvard Professor of Oceanography before he got the bug to expose the truth. Some (Like Wiseman in Archaeology Magazine of 'Camelot in Kentucky' article from 2001) ridicule Fell as "self-taught" in matters such as Ogham. Truth is, Fell took one of the only small courses available at the time from Edinburgh University. Who can really learn the truth from academics that hide it? His name was made dirt by academics but his legacy from America B.C and Bronze Age America has been sweet vindication.

Here is a little of the story of his travails, which is presented for more reason than just the obvious need to reinforce on the existence and loss of Keltic seacraft technology. The rise and fall of Celtic sea power has been strangely neglected {Although the movie 'Spartacus' shows Kirk Douglas arranging passage to Italy from the Kelts[Silesians and Galatians are Kelts back to the time of Punt] who ruled the Sea.} by most historians and archaeologists as to prompt much skepticism when first I began to report Celtic inscription in America. 'I can't say I've ever heard that the Celts were seafarers,' was a typical comment. Those who recall that Julius Caesar described the Britons as mostly naked savages, wearing only iron torques about their necks, {A torquetum or tanawa is an ancient sextant known to have existed in this period as Maui navigated for a well known Greek and was able to calculate longitude.} sometimes with the skin of a beast cast over the shoulders, think of the Britons as having nothing better than one-man coracles for crossing water.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, most of Book III of Caesar's 'De Bello Gallico' is devoted to the greatest naval battle he was ever called upon to mount. And his adversaries? None other than the Celts of Brittany, whose fleet was swelled by the arrival of a flotilla they had summoned from their allies in Britain! The combined Gallic and British naval armament comprised an immensely powerful force, numbering, so Caesar tells us, no less than 220 ships, all larger than and superior in construction to those of the opposing Roman navy under Admiral Brutus. These Celtic ships, Caesar says, were so soundly constructed that they could outride tempestuous or contrary winds upon the very ocean itself without sustaining injury ('De Bello Gallico', books III,XIII,I.). It is clear that these fine vessels, which towered over the Roman galleys, had the capability of crossing the Atlantic Ocean 'vasto atque aperto mari', "upon the vast open sea," as Caesar indicates."(2)

Does it cross your mind that these ships were in fact employed in such voyages to the Americas? Why had Caesar never seen their like before? The wind went down and the Roman galleys threw grappling hooks into the Celtic rigging and sails then boarded them. Caesar made a deal (as was his wont) with the cousins of his ancestors who were not in control of all. He gave them full citizenship of Rome, which they in fact had established after defeating the Tarquin kings of Etruria. Thus the nature of Catholicism and the Anglican church has a long and sordid past association, as they outlawed the Druids and put a bounty on their heads. Can you see why we think the Toltecs or others in America might have Druidic roots? There is no further mention of British or Gaulish naval vessels in Caesar's commentaries, nor does Tacitus in the century that followed give any space or consideration to native naval might. It seems that the battle against the Veneti was the end of Celtic sea power in classical times. Except for the periodic truculence by British chiefs like Queen Boadicaea.

NORMAN TOTTEN: - "The Eye of God and the Agricultural Grid
By Norman Totten
Bentley College, Waltham, Massachusetts

Impetus for this kind of research was the need to understand the "atna-kuna" motif so prevalent in Celtic New England and Iberia, and frequently associated with the "eye of Bel". James Whittall has been locating examples of it in Portugal and Spain. Fell, Dix, and Oedel have recently published observations about it.

This presentation is limited to what seems to be the two predominant symbolic forms of the sun and earth in ancient inscriptions - - the eye of the sun god and the cultivated field grid. Both have occurred in numerous varieties, visually and phonetically. This paper should be read as a progress report, incomplete in its consideration and somewhat tentative in its conclusions regarding a vast and complex problem.

I. Morphology and Dissemination: Eye of the Sun

Though he later equivocated about which direction the evolution had occurred, Sir Arthur Evans (1984, p. 303) set forth the basic forms of the eye of Ra - - from one complete with lashes (rays) to a circle (pupil) enclosing a smaller circle or dot (iris)." (6)

This is important to understanding the worldwide cultures and the elite corporate traders. The circle with a dot is the Mark of Qayin or Cain (Gardner's Genesis of the Grail Kings and other sources) and as such it is the adept cartouche or signifying token for the family of Jesus and the 'arch-tectons' (Septuagint) of the Great Pyramid.

In 'Bel' we have the Keltic God as well as the Mesopotamian (later) God. To find them so closely associated or connected in the Iberias that now carry names like Spain, Ireland and North America adds a great additional clue to the Tartessian (source of the 'Biblical Ships of Tarshis') sites being excavated or studied in Anatolia and Portugal. They all start with Iberia in the Caspian and the Black Sea region that is the genetic homeland of the Kelts some 30-35,000 years ago. Because we can genetically and forensically trace and track these people and marry them to dateable artifacts we have a credible history untainted by kingly or priestly power mongers.

Another ESOP excerpt from the work of Totten deals with Moroccan monastics exiled to America in the 5th Century AD. "In Figuig the monks were solitary (monachos), but in communal life (Koinos Bios) of brothers (fratres), a friary. Their form of testifying (martyrium) under persecution was not death in an arena for the pleasure of pagan spectators but exile, exile to the wilderness of America." (7)

TERRACOTTA HEAD OF A ROMAN IN MEXICO: - "This year, Scandinavians celebrate the 1,000 years since Leif Ericsson sailed to the New World from Greenland. Bjarni Herjolfsson was supposedly the first to step ashore on the New World. Historians have long believed that Ericsson's colony at L'Anse aux Meadows, on the northern-most tip of Newfoundland, represented the first evidence of Europeans on the continent {When Farley Mowat wrote about it in 'Westviking' he was ridiculed.}. However, a wide variety of archaeological evidence points to earlier contact.

A black terracotta head of a bearded man, about 2 in (5cm) tall, found in the Toluca Valley about 40 miles (64km) west of Mexico City in 1933 and dated by thermoluminescence to about 200 AD, could be the first reliable proof that Roman sailors reached America. It is different in style from any other known pre-Columbian artwork and has been identified as Roman by art experts. Although much was written about the head since its discovery, its whereabouts were unknown until 1994, when it was found locked away in a Mexico City museum by a US anthropologist appropriately named Dr Roman Hristov.

A review of the circumstances surrounding the head's discovery confirmed it was placed in its burial ground no later than 1510 - a decade before the Spanish arrived in Meso-America. Crucially, the head was excavated from the site by professionals, said David Kelley, an archaeologist at the University of Calgary, in Alberta {Professor Emeritus} Canada. 'This was sealed under three floors, it's as close to archaeological certainty as you can get.' {Emphasis and N.B. He also confirmed Fell was correct about Woden Lithi in Peterborough in 3500 BCE - Ogham tract he called Tiffinaugh from Libya}

Archaeologist David Grove, of the University of Illinois, agreed that the head was Roman, but pointed out that there was no evidence of Roman influence on pre-Columbian cultures. He suggested that the head could have been washed ashore from a Roman shipwreck in the Gulf of Mexico. Even so, there seems no denying that Roman sailors had reached American waters. 'Ancient Mesoamerica, v.10, p.207; Scotsman, Guardian, D. Mail, 10 Feb; New Scientist, 12 Feb 2000.'

cont'd
 
Give me a few minutes (well, more like an hour or two or three or four - definitely before I go to bed tonight), and I'll talk about my research concerning some things that Wolter talks about, like Templars over here circa 1300, etc. It is a working theory I am, well, working on, but also pretty comprehensive, as well as including all kinds 'o fun things like Secret Societies, buried treasure (including Montezuma's stuff, etc.), some of this paranormal phenomenon occurring in places like the SLV and Uintah Basin, and many places especially in the Southwest and Western States, millions of untold Native American slaves (with Taos, NM actually being a major slave trading hub at one point). Euro involvement at the head of the sacrificial Aztecs, etc. All kinds of fun things. Fomenko's stuff is just too massive a piece of work to try to discuss on a forum or convince anyone of and I am simply making people aware of the gist of his theory (the expansion of the true written record and chronology by about 2,500 years into the past), that I subscribe to it, and where, if at all curious, people kind find out more about his theory (again, that 7 volume work being the place to go), for themselves to ponder.

If anything, Ufology, I can try to at least make my take on this stuff quite original and more entertaining then whatever rerun of Seinfeld or The Big Bnag Theory is on TV tonight or tomorrow night, lol..
Very Interesting. Sounds like @Gene Steinberg and @Christopher O'Brien should consider having you on as a guest! Hope you get feeling better soon. Pile on those immune booster supplements!
 
Chinesepict.jpg

To stay focused on the pictoglyph thing a bit, I definitely see some resemblance, I also see quite the 'stretch' being made. Like with D (this one strikes me as a large stretch-to-fit-theory; I don't really see the resemblance), C, A. And the first part of E can be called a Venus Cross (common in the SW), too, instead of a Chinese character. I don't go around insulting academics (Historians and Archaeologists, in this case) as a matter of course, and do respect their intellectual capacities and time and effort they spend in their lives devoted to such things, but when you look at Academia's opinion of things like the pyramids in Egypt and 'who' built them, their take on the megalithic structures in South America, etc., well it seems pretty obvious to many of us that those sheepskins don't necessarily mean as much as they think.

The majority of PhDs will claim that the pyramids were a tomb, built with ropes and dirt ramps and that the Incas manged to pull off the spectacular rock work in SA with copper chisels. I think many of us believe that is utter nonsense. But, because said PhDs are institutionalized (controlled), that is the result - you get smart people making really silly/stupid claims that are actually laughable. You won't get awarded a PhD if you suggest otherwise, though, nor will you be given grants, etc. Just from glancing at this pic, I might put Dr. Ruskamp in that same category - an academic who's thought process is constrained upon the issue; therefore he tries to force a square peg through a round hole.

Pretty much every pictoglyph you come across in the SW/West is ALWAYS attributed by academics to some Native American culture (Ruskamp is obviously breaking the mold a bit here and going with the Chinese, but only breaking the mold so much). What most don't consider/know is that some of these pictoglyphs throughout the SW/West were made by white dudes. And they were made in regards to a marking system to identify the location of buried treasure. Outlandish sounding? I have never seen the movie National Treasure 2, but I know it dealt with the subject of the Knights of the Golden Circle. I feel pretty confident in saying that if you have seen that movie, throw whatever was presented about the KGC in the trash - for it is Hollywoodized. And done so intentionally to spread disinfo about the subject, or innocently in the form of a screen writer coming across a little info on the KGC and saying, "Hey, I could write a pretty cool fictional movie script incorporating those KGC dudes, and then maybe sell it to Disney."

But, the KGC was a very real thing, as were their activities in caching gold (gold from the mining field,s to gold stolen from trains, to deposits of gold coins up to a bout $1,000 face value - today, $1,000 in $20 gold pieces is worth a helluva lot more than $1,000). They were also themselves Treasure Hunters. Looking for previously buried caches of gold/silver (mostly gold). These caches can be traced back to the Aztecs and the Templars. And others.

And herein lies the actual tie-in to the paranormal (pre-KGC caches placed by Aztec Priest and/or Templars) that I will delve into a bit more.

This is Ophir, North America. The Biblical King Solomon is actually Sulieman the Magnificent, and Solomon's Temple still stands today in Istanbul - it is called the Hagia Sophia. Further, Hiram Abiff (the guy making the trips to Ophir for Solomon) should actually be called something like Hiram Abifiratti, or something Italian sounding, for that tale (Biblical and Masonic) is based upon Venetian (potentially Genoese) maritime concerns. Over here is where the Templars acquired their vast wealth out of thin air, in the mines of the Southwest and West (Four corners States, Nevada, Cali, etc.). And that is why I had to introduce Fomenko's stuff a bit - things like the Old Testament being a rendition of events occurring in Europe/Eurasia post 1100AD, etc., for he is the one that makes the connection that Solomon is a retelling and slight name change of the real dude, Sulieman (Fomenko doesn't touch the Ophir stuff, or anything like that, though).

When it comes to the topic of diffusionism, I absolutely subscribe to the notion that NA was approached from the West first, not the Atlantic side. But, it is limited to within the last 1,000 years. Including the Egyptian influences, etc. Egypt I consider to be nothing more than the Royal Graveyard of The Empire, and the Empire was not responsible for the pyramids, but it is pretty easy to come along and chisel up with hieroglyphs a bunch of sandstone/granite monuments that are pre-existing. Some of those ceremonies made it over here, including the mummy stuff. A reported 1909 discover in the Grand Canyon is circumstantial evidence I apply to this.

I mentioned that nobody seems to raise an eyebrow about the fact that the Anasazi just seemed to up and disappear right about the same time the Aztecs just kind of showed up out of nowhere, from there northern homeland, Azatlan. I am working a theory, also, that ties Azatlan to the SLV. Azatlan - home of the cranes. The SLV, where every year in Monte Vista, the annual Crane Festival is still held as they migrate. There is a reservoir in South Park (a Bit north of the SLV) that is only like 10-15 feet deep, because the land is so flat. The SLV is quite flat, too. A minor climate change can take a land of a large, but shallow, lake and dry it up in a matter of a few decades. And then a few centuries of a persistent wind acting upon the dry lake bed (sand), and you get cool places to go visit like the Great Sand Dunes National Monument, NW of Alamosa.

On the Pacific approach and then Anasazi/Aztec connection, consider this with the Na-Dene language group, the largest single group speaking this language today being the Navajo:

616px-Na-Dene_langs.png

It seems to look like the Navajo were 'split off' and came down south - perhaps an 'enemy form the north'. Was this on their own, or did they come down with a group that traversed the Bearing/Pacific? I would suggest the latter.

If you look at the Uto-Aztecan language, well, it implies the Aztecs coming down from the North, perhaps around the Four Corners area?:

Uto-Aztecan_langs.png

Things I ponder ...

I'm struggling to figure out how to present all of this so that I remain on topic and concise with all of this - let me think about it for a bit, and I'll figure out a way to present it all in 2-4 posts so I can make sense to people (even if they don't accept my theory, at least they will understand it, lol).
 
I don't think I posted this here before - not that a single person here in this thread has indicated they have read anything in the variety of posts I have made in this thread. But UFOlogy and Chris probably actually are capable of reading so I will put it here.

You just can't help yerself, can ya Robert. Gotta try to sneak in an insult towards me, that I am not capable of reading. Lol. I giggled when I read that. Don't deny it now that I pointed it out - it'll just make you look silly and childish. Yes, Robert, I have read your stuff. I just haven't really been impressed by it. And I suggest you learn to accept that kind of stuff without getting pissed/offended and hurling insults. Most people think I am nuts with my theories. I'm cool with that and it doesn't upset me or make me mad at people for not subscribing to what I do. It is okay with me. And when you say things, like:

As I said earlier in this thread - a million years ago man travelled across the horizon and left artifacts for us to date.

Well, I have a hard time taking you too seriously. 1,000,000 years ago, eh? You claim to know what humans were doing one million years ago?!? ROFLMAO. While you are certainly free to think such, I find such claims to be outrageous, and I have a hard time taking you seriously. And yes, I am aware of researchers that make such claims as this, how they date them, etc., so you don't need to 'educate' me on how you are dating such. It is just a ridiculous claim, IMO, not worthy of a response. You should learn to live with that kind of stuff, as most of us do.

Sorry Robert. I don't know what to tell you other than to suggest you learn to not get all butt-hurt when people aren't interested in your Truth (that you present with a whole bunch 'o ARROGANCE) and think you are claiming to know things that some, like me, consider it IMPOSSIBLE for you to know - like what the hell was going on with humans a million years ago.

Get it?
 
Many people quoted by CJ would roll over in their graves if they saw the words he puts in their mouths. He lies and prevaricates with the best of them and has paranoid issues including thinking it is just him I referred to when making the comment about how people do not address facts or make arguments - preferring ego and ad hominems. His assertions about the Anastazi are not unique or new - Collins and myself have addressed it and earlier disappearances of peoples including the Pueblans. Look up Inyo for far earlier issues and ask what happened to the Catalina Island white people, Silverbell, Grand Canyon Egyptians etc. The KGC are part of the FOGC - worldwide - I did a whole book addressing it. I did another book on Templars in America and my namesake founded a Templar revival group after he fought side by side with them at Bannockburn. He made the first Baron Baird and set him up in control of his North American bank at Oak Island. Yes, I am related to Robert de Bruges. Directly and more generally through the BR I have detailed before in this thread.


  1. The Hexham Heads and Gold Crosses
Cruciform (crucifix form) gold discs from Ireland have amazed some Tzadik researchers. I too am amazed, because people still say metal working was a Bronze Age (or any other Age) invention. As you now know Dolni Vestonici has proof of metal-working going back almost 30,000 years. It involved a kiln inside another kiln which was still being used to make special swords for Vikings in medieval times.

Spalling was used to remove metals in Lake Superior's numerous (over 7,000) mines which I am confident go back before the last Ice Age. Spalling involves setting a fire near a rock and splitting it. When you have a cave, a fire and wind you have a very powerful smelter. Of course these techniques were kept secret and made those who had the secret into very powerful people. The legend of Excalibur is this old even though the first sword may only have been an alloy like bronze. I have learned a great deal from Bairds and Troubadours or other archaeomythology as they tell their stories.

http://www.museum.ie/en/exhibition/g...f-68edb8e21a96

In the era of Melchizedek I think you could say the Zadokites and Tzadik are one and the same. It always amazes me how a little linguistic knowledge unlocks such amazing history. In short the Hasidim are the Zadokites or zealots from the family of Jesus or Merovingian complex. Mare is a word meaning Sea in languages including Latin. Again we remove the vowels and get to see the Sea people or derivation of the title Pelasgi which all Pharaohs had. Some Pharaohs had ships entombed with them and archaeology brought these to light (fortunately). They were Phoenician designs and look like Viking ships, of course, from millennia later. The Sea People were the holders of secrets like Copper Keels (See Thread) windlasses and torquetums or Tanawa. (See thread addressing what was found in the West Irian caves near Indonesia where we have last year's amazing proof extending man's culture way WAY back to more than a half million years.) What level of consciousness exists in our biological etheric energy such as used in Tai Chi? Is nature able to give us ways to achieve great things without our full comprehension? Did the ancients have to know why their astrolabes worked?

The Tzadik do not know their own origins because languages like Ogham have been proscribed and lied about since Rome put bounties on the heads of Druids. This was done by three different Roman Emperors but few academics seek to understand the implications. A Tzadik or 'righteous one' in Hasidic Kabbalah or Kabbalistic study is a devoted person who some think is near to god. They allow people to think they are gods when ego moves them.

The crucifix or cross is a very old representation or symbol. It is a mandala of the simplest sort with the four primary forces converging in the center. In modern Catholicism you see it used as protection when people cross themselves. The Tzadik are remnants of the arch-tectons (from whence comes the word architect) who built the Great Pyramid of Iesa. Perhaps it would be more correct to say the architects referred to in the Septuagint (A Greek Bible) are the family of Jesus and Joseph and the Tzadik aspire to understand the sacrosanct or secret knowledge thereof.

They are a most studious fellowship to be certain. The following comment on the crosses includes Crichton Miller who I came across at the site of and for Philip Gardiner who I invited to come to World-Mysteries and who has expert articles here. Crichton showed many uses in sea-going for ancient Irish (Keltoi) designs. It also mentions these designs were found all over the Bronze Age Americas just as Barry Fell proved (Search for him to see numerous threads). Philip Gardiner authored The Shining Ones which is Heliopolitan research, I have placed a link to another book by Philip which includes a review by me of his work. The Leo person is the mentor or teacher of this Reve (Rabbi) as in Abaris (See thread).

"This circle containing a cross is obviously a very simple symbol but is found everywhere. The Egyptians used it to denote a city but as you will see it has many other meanings. An Emin variation and symbol was a triangle containing a cross.


The sun cross, also known as the wheel cross, Odin's cross, or Woden's cross, a cross inside a circle, is a common symbol in artifacts of the Americas and Prehistoric Europe, particularly during the Neolithic to Bronze Age periods. {Peterborough is a site tied in with Avebury Plain and where Barry Fell translated the story of Woden-Lithi coming to mine Lake Superior's unique ores. David Kelley is a top linguist who supports Fell's assertions and translation through Ogham or a version known as Tiffinaugh which is a Libyan script - Libya was all of Africa including Egypt where Gaedhils later seen as Vikings re-located during glacial times that forced their moving. Linear A and B are important linguistic origins from the Phoenicians you can learn about coming from Old European near Dolni Vestonici as documented in Language of the Gods by Gimbutas.}

Crossed circles scratched on stones have been recovered from Paleolithic cave sites in the Pyrenees.

At the Callanish Stones in the Outer Hebrides, the most famous megalithic site in Scotland, {I have seen Callanish dated to 9,000 years ago.} crossing avenues of standing stones extend from a circle. Scratched into stone or painted on pottery, as on that of the Samara culture, the crossed-circle symbol appears in such diverse areas as the Pyrenees, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, the Iranian plateau, and the cities of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa in the Indus River valley. {The Druids may originate here according to Peter Berresford Ellis, I say Bharat means Baird and it is the name of this whole region we call India. We Bairds are northern folk but traveled all the World so you can locate our homeland in many places. Yes, there is something to be learned in the name of the modern society which I deplore, called OBOD.}

A theory on the origins of the Celtic Cross was published in 2001 by author and researcher, Crichton E M Miller. This theory, purports the Celtic cross is a pre Christian symbol and represents an instrument of simple design capable of keeping time by observing the motions of the stars and planets.

In the prehistoric religion of Bronze Age Europe, crosses in circles appear frequently on artifacts identified as cult items, for example the "miniature standard" with an amber inlay that shows a cross shape when held against the light, dating to the Nordic Bronze Age, held at the National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen. The Bronze Age symbol has also been connected with the spoked chariot wheel, which at the time was four-spoked (compare the Linear B ideogram 243 "wheel" ) This technological innovation, invented by the late Proto-Indo-Europeans reached Europe in the mid-2nd millennium BC. In the context of a culture that celebrated the Sun chariot, it may also have had a "solar" connotation.

Wheel pendants dating to the second half of the 2nd millennium BC, found in Zürich, are held at the Swiss National Museum. Variants include a six-spoked wheel, a central empty circle, and a second circle with twelve spokes surrounding one of four spokes.

Ornamental pins, found in Switzerland, date to the first half of the 2nd millennium BC; their circular heads are incised with crosses.

The wheel appears as a solar motif in Celtic mythology, presumably associated with Taranis, e.g. on the Gundestrup cauldron, and at an altar to the sun god at Lypiatt, Gloucestershire.

It has been claimed, but also denied, that the Celtic cross was originated by combining the sun cross with the plain Christian cross. See Celtic cross.
The Sassanian Empire, which is called Eran Shahr (Aryan Empire) in Middle Persian, used a symbol similar to the sun cross on its vexilloid, which is called the Derafsh Kaviani.


In Wicca and other neo-Pagan religions the sun cross most commonly represents the sun and the four quadrants the wheel of the year, i.e. the four seasonal cycles of the year.

In astrology, the cross in a circle represents the planet Earth, formerly believed to be the center of the cosmos in Classical times.

The Norwegian Nazi party Nasjonal Samling used a golden sun cross on a red background as its official symbol from 1933 until 1945. The cross within a circle was ascribed to Saint Olaf, the patron saint of Norway, and the colours were those of the coat of arms of Norway. The Bulgarian national socialist movement Ratnik also used a sun cross as its official symbol. Various white nationalist and Neo-Nazi groups use the sun cross to represent the white race, i.e., the Western or European branch of the Indo-European peoples; the Knights Party also uses it in their official flag.

In the Ascended Master Teachings, a group of religions based on Theosophy, the most important deities are St. Germain and the Master Jesus. St. Germain is regarded as having a twin flame (divine complement or celestial wife) who is an ascended lady master named Portia. In iconography of the Lady Master Portia, she is shown as wearing around her neck a white sun cross with a violet background, since she works with St. Germain, who is regarded as the master of the seventh of the seven rays, the violet ray.
wiki


In fact it can be found on the ground. Avebury is a vast stone circle round a village with a crossroads at its centre. seen from the air it is this symbol. The ancient temple on a hill top near Mount Hermon is a smaller version.

Some say it is a sun symbol others the planet and the 'law of 4' may apply equally to both. Leo saw the four tribes on the sun and the four seasons on the planet but i doubt if the ancients saw either. The heart is a bit like this with its 4 chambers though. and as mentioned above the 'wheel' probably was the greatest invention of all time. So does it represent that? Well in theory it predates the wheel and the chariot. there are of course flowers and fruit that look like it. The ancient riddle of squaring the circle may have quartering it as its origin. The compass came much later. Many prehistoric carvings were spiral and one might see a serpent there.

The circle is easy to understand. The sun and moon are circular, people stood in circles around altars, danced round totem poles, sat around fires. The Emin groups were called circles just as we have circles of friends. It is the cross that is mysterious. A spiral leads to the centre and the two diameters meet there. If any of you know why it is there do let on

reve"

I see nothing mysterious about the cross, and I respect this gentleman's thinking. I must be missing something. The energy from the four comes cascading down or into the wearer of the discs. They are thus protected or surrounded by Tiqqun. In further reading I see the Reve character is not the leader and he appeals to others above him. I also see Excalibur and almost want to join the convo to tell him about early metal-working secrets and history at least 25,000 years older that has these same grail or Merlin myths. Paul Devereaux and cognitive archaeology is indeed a great thing as JennM points out.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/archi...19142-p-6.html
I chose to finish my analysis after looking further into what little Leo may have been and the abuse borne of occult projection and possession Reve seems to have endured. I do not need to say (I hope) that all these con games are not new and Gnostic Archons, Dragons and aliens are all from the same root hallucinations and energy. As Jung said (see Thread on The Tibetan Book of the Dead) a believer in a cultural stereotype or religion will see Gabriel or Shiva or whatever prevailing projected energy form they want to see, until death is very near and they go toward the Light.

There are many modern acolytes of Tiqqun who might know something or might really just be players and posers. You can judge this little snipette and seek it's origins through your browser if interested. Personally I like it.

"Let Us Share Our Poverty, Not Our Misery!

Agapê [non-erotic, benevolent love]

I Would Prefer Not To

Tiqqun

Mene, Tekel, Peres.

The Unavowable Enemy

“Because what crime and madness objectivize is the absence of a transcendental homeland.”

The Possessed of Nothingness

Paradoxes of Sovereignty

The Era of Pure Guilt

Homo Sacer [sacred/accursed man]"

The words Mene etc. relate to something near and dear to Isaac Newton who wrote extensively about Daniel from the Bible. Mene is Menes an Egyptian Pharaoh, Oh well, you can also follow this rabbit hole if you wish. http://biblehub.com/daniel/5-25.htm
Philip Gardiner is always worth reading.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=jDV...ird%22&f=false
 
Last edited:
Cat Jockey and Robert Baird:
I find your childish contention shocking and appalling.
You all need a time out.
Adult humans acting in this fashion rather than being graceful..:mad:

I don't care who started it, you all need to step back and think about how this posturing makes you look.

Argue facts not people:confused:
 
Jeez, post enough unassailable walls of postings much guys?:p


Dear F

So which is it. Not enough arguing facts or is it that YOU cannot read (to actually read requires comprehension - not seeing words you cannot contextually grasp) and have nothing to add?

Do not read or attempt to learn it might indeed cause you confusion as you exhibit.

I took CJ to task and proved his own words and quotes say things that conflict and his denial of the existence of Plato or the rest of his crap is NONsense - not worth further reflection or walls of text.

He would be a good person to interview in the programs here - so would Walt Willis and his guru (now dead) who held conventions in the desert near Inyo for over two decades selling the same shite all over this site.

FACTS!!!!!????

You would not know them if they bit you in the ass!
 
Dear F

So which is it. Not enough arguing facts or is it that YOU cannot read (to actually read requires comprehension - not seeing words you cannot contextually grasp) and have nothing to add?

Do not read or attempt to learn it might indeed cause you confusion as you exhibit.

I took CJ to task and proved his own words and quotes say things that conflict and his denial of the existence of Plato or the rest of his crap is NONsense - not worth further reflection or walls of text.

He would be a good person to interview in the programs here - so would Walt Willis and his guru (now dead) who held conventions in the desert near Inyo for over two decades selling the same shite all over this site.

FACTS!!!!!????

You would not know them if they bit you in the ass!
I'm not sure..are you angry enough?
 
Dear F

So which is it. Not enough arguing facts or is it that YOU cannot read (to actually read requires comprehension - not seeing words you cannot contextually grasp) and have nothing to add?

Do not read or attempt to learn it might indeed cause you confusion as you exhibit.

I took CJ to task and proved his own words and quotes say things that conflict and his denial of the existence of Plato or the rest of his crap is NONsense - not worth further reflection or walls of text.

He would be a good person to interview in the programs here - so would Walt Willis and his guru (now dead) who held conventions in the desert near Inyo for over two decades selling the same shite all over this site.

FACTS!!!!!????

You would not know them if they bit you in the ass!
You are some seriously nasty, combative stuff. Fact.
Who hurt you?
 
Dear F

So which is it. Not enough arguing facts or is it that YOU cannot read (to actually read requires comprehension - not seeing words you cannot contextually grasp) and have nothing to add?

Do not read or attempt to learn it might indeed cause you confusion as you exhibit.

I took CJ to task and proved his own words and quotes say things that conflict and his denial of the existence of Plato or the rest of his crap is NONsense - not worth further reflection or walls of text.

He would be a good person to interview in the programs here - so would Walt Willis and his guru (now dead) who held conventions in the desert near Inyo for over two decades selling the same shite all over this site.

FACTS!!!!!????

You would not know them if they bit you in the ass!
(Laughing out loud)You turned your attack to me and accused me of illiteracy.
Do you realize how you look right now?
I was calling out the childish argumentative tone.
 
If Catjockey said the world is flat and your mama is a marmot, so what? You're going to get all flustered and aggro?
PS I still love you though, sharp knife ->hard cheese
Small_Clanger.jpg
 
Last edited:
Many people quoted by CJ would roll over in their graves if they saw the words he puts in their mouths.

So, now you are a mind reader of dead people? Interesting claim you make. For the record, who are these 'many people I have quoted'? For I have done no such thing. I did throw a little 'mind reading' zinger back your way (don't forget, you started, and are in the lead, of the 'insult party') saying something like Plato wouldn't be proud of your logic and reasoning skills, but that was obviously me a being a smartass. And I 'put words in the mouth' of Robert, not Isaac, Newton with the bangers and mash comment, but that was just a smartass paraphrase of the truth. What the hell are you talking about, dude? Exactly who are these 'many dead' people I 'quoted' whom I have inserted words into their mouths? I have quoted Fomenko, a quip from Kasparov, and a snippet from a website about he Bible/Greek stuff. That is the ONLY three people I have quoted. And this whole referring to me like you aren't talking to me or I ain't in the room is just silly, dude.

What are you talking about? You are just flat out making sh!t up about what I have said, AGAIN, in an effort to attack me. I have stated FACTS about dead people (which is NOT quoting), like Newton and a few others, concerning their KNOWN WRITTEN views on the Falsified Chronology, but I am NOT guilty of that which you accuse me, namely 'quoting many dead people', nor was that anything resembling 'putting words in their mouths - at all. Could ya clarify and point out the dead people I have inserted words into the mouths of and point out to me where exactly I did that? 'Cause it looks to me, for the SECOND time now, that out are just flat out making stuff up about my posts.

Look. I'm new here. Every forum has its own flavor concerning what kind of back and forths, like we are engaged in, will be allowed. I do not know the limits with the Admin and Mods here, yet, and I don't want to find out the hard way. So, I really am done responding to anything you say after this post with pointing out yer arrogance, your misrepresentation of what I am saying, etc., and you can carry on as you wish with that - alone. My ass is going High Road on ya after this post, like that road you see me cutting with that snowcat at well over 12,000' on the Continental Divide in my avatar. Feel free to keep up with your petty insults, though. As mentioned people are not stupid like you seem to think they are and see that stuff as clearly as I do. And, quite frankly, since I have pulled yer pants down a couple times in this thread, I am beginning to wonder if you might be intentionally trying to stir up a sh!t storm in this thread in order to get it closed so you can save face. Hell no, buddy. I ain't going to help you do that if that is what you are now attempting. I'm not going to help you with that if that is what you are now engaged in. And if you are not engaged in something like that, and this is just your personality in true form coming out and who you are, well ...

He lies and prevaricates with the best of them and has paranoid issues including thinking it is just him I referred to when making the comment about how people do not address facts or make arguments - preferring ego and ad hominems.

So now I am a liar? Huh? What the hell are you talking about? And you got that ad hominem and ego thing backwards - and I have pointed out that tactic of yours a a few posts ago.

Your three dollar words like prevaricates do not impress me, dude. I too have a very, very extensive vocabulary. And ya know what? There are plenty of really, really smart people that would need to look that word up, simply because they just haven't come across it before, and using words like that doesn't 'prove' you to be super smart - it only means you know how to use a Thesaurus. And perhaps you should refamiliraize yourself with the meaning of that three dollar word, for the way you are trying to apply it to me is not accurate, and I have done NO such thing. And now I am also being accused of multiple lies (you used the plural, so, multiple)? Huh? Care to point these lies out, too, in addition to the 'many dead people I am quoting'.

And ya wanna know the ironic thing here, Bobby Boy? You calling me a liar actually makes YOU the liar, lol ...

His assertions about the Anastazi are not unique or new - Collins and myself have addressed it and earlier disappearances of peoples including the Pueblans.

Hey look at that, Robert, some common ground between us. Quite telling that instead of trying to explore that in a civil fashion with me, you try to use that common ground to attack me. Lol. Wouldn't that be a better and more productive way to deal with that common ground? For us to discuss this common ground and see where we might have some different ideas to discuss on that common ground? Seems like the sensible and civil way to approach such, but you don't seem to have any interest in being sensible and civil with me. You seem to only want to DEMAND I agree with you and accept your opinion as fact, and if I don't, I am egotistical. What a joke, dude. Gimme a damn break, buddy.

Look up Inyo for far earlier issues and ask what happened to the Catalina Island white people, Silverbell, Grand Canyon Egyptians etc.

I have my own theories concerning the 'Grand Canyon Egyptians', something I intend to briefly touch upon in coming posts. If nobody agrees with my theories, that's cool, and I will not get all pissed and petty and start calling people egotistical and non-curious, as appears to be part of your schtick, if they aren't - to each their own, ya know? Further, there ain't anyone on planet Earth with whom I agree with 100%, 100% of the time - that's called life, and it doesn't get me all bent out of shape like it seems to do to you.

The KGC are part of the FOGC - worldwide - I did a whole book addressing it. I did another book on Templars in America and my namesake founded a Templar revival group after he fought side by side with them at Bannockburn. He made the first Baron Baird and set him up in control of his North American bank at Oak Island. Yes, I am related to Robert de Bruges. Directly and more generally through the BR I have detailed before in this thread.

You and your books, lol. Who cares, dude. You have your research and opinions upon such subjects, well, fine. I have some too, and if they run counter to yours, well, so what? In your book, pun intended, that would just make me egotistical for not bowing down to you as the all-knowing dude of everything KGC and Templar. That little arrogance problem of yours that seems to crop up in every damn post. And yes, I too ascribe the KGC as an international thing, and will go as far to say that I think, at this point, that the Jesuits had a strong behind the scenes hand in it, and some of that gold was transferred back to Europe post Civil War, potentially via Buffalo Bill Cody and his Wild West Show.

Wouldn't it be better if we were to present our ideas on the KGC, and civilly point out to one another where we might have different ideas? I think so, but you don't ...

Cruciform (crucifix form) gold discs from Ireland have amazed some Tzadik researchers. I too am amazed, because people still say metal working was a Bronze Age (or any other Age) invention. As you now know Dolni Vestonici has proof of metal-working going back almost 30,000 years. It involved a kiln inside another kiln which was still being used to make special swords for Vikings in medieval times.

I don't think you know what the word 'proof' means, for you just throw it out there on anyone's opinion that suits yer fancy.

Yea, well, did ya know it is real damn hard to make Bronze without tin? And are you aware of the FACT that there wasn't knowledge of metallic tin in the Bronze Age, let alone 30,000 years ago? That is just one more of many, many things that ought to raise one's eyebrow concerning the Falsified Chronology, which is what defines and and 'created' that Bronze Age. Let me quote ya a living dude a bit more - Fomenko. From the first volume of that 7 volume series:

Many chemists and metallurgists have been reporting the following peculiar circumstance for quite a while, namely that no bronze could possibly have been manufactured in the Scaligerian [Falsified Chron.] "ancient' Bronze Age. Professor Michele Giua, "a prominent and versatile specialist in organic synthesis, as well as the chemistry of explosives and plastics" ([245], from the cover annotation), the author of an in-depth work titled The History of Chemistry, writes the following (basing his logical construction on Scaliger's [Falsified] chronology, naturally):

"Copper … had been known from prehistoric times not just in its free state … but also as bronze, an alloy of copper and tin. During the prehistoric epoch known as the Bronze Age, bronze had been used for the manufacture of various utensils, jewelry, weapons, etc. However, the issue of ancient tin metallurgy remains extremely nebulous. Metallic tin was not known in the Bronze Age; nevertheless, it had to have been used for the manufacture of bronze. All we can do is assume that a metal of a higher fusibility had been manufactured as a result of fusing copper with some minerals rich in tin content. Copper had thus been known been known before tin, whose metallurgy is a lot more complex. However, the fact that bronze had been known earlier than tin does not clarify a number of other problems of ancient history." ([245], pages 17-18)

The picture is perfectly clear. As we can see, the fact that tin metallurgy is more complex than that of copper is common knowledge. Hence bronze, being a fusion of copper and tin, must have appeared after the discovery of the latter. The Scalgerian [Flasified] history has it the other way round - bronze is supposed to have been discovered before tin, in the Bronze Age. This contradiction in the Scalgerian [Falsified] chronology can be explained by the fact that the chronologers of that school had neither been chemists nor metallurgists. How were they to know that the compilation of a history textbook requires that the description of the discovery of tin should precede that of the invention of bronze? However, the historians of the XVII-XVIII century were driven by altogether different considerations, neither caring much for tin, nit indeed for science itself. None of them would consider consulting with a chemist. As a result, "ancient" Greek heroes happily hack at each other with bronze swords that need tin for their manufacture, which has not yet been discovered. Modern chemists are naturally confused by such historical tableaux, and are earnestly questioning the reasons for the existence of such oddities in the Scalgerian [Falsified] history of chemistry and metallurgy.

Our explanation is a very simple one. The Bronze Age falls within the epoch of the XIV-XVI century, when tin had already been discovered (after copper, of course). Consider the allegedly ancient bronze idols from Luristan currently in the Louvre's possession q.v. in fig 1.56. Michele Giua cites them as examples of "ancient" bronze art. However, these artful Bronze Age figurines most probably were made in the XV-XVII century.


(See thread addressing what was found in the West Irian caves near Indonesia where we have last year's amazing proof extending man's culture way WAY back to more than a half million years.)

I think I have already established that you are a little lose and fast with the word 'proof'. And if you are using geologic time here (just guessing) as your 'proof', well there are some issues with such geologic dating.

The Tzadik do not know their own origins because languages like Ogham have been proscribed and lied about since Rome put bounties on the heads of Druids. This was done by three different Roman Emperors but few academics seek to understand the implications.

You and I have a far different understanding and opinion of this whole Roman thing, especially concerning the where, when and who. So, ya ain't doing much for me here.

A Tzadik or 'righteous one' in Hasidic Kabbalah or Kabbalistic study is a devoted person who some think is near to god. They allow people to think they are gods when ego moves them.

You seem to got that 'think they are gods when the ego moves them' going on, Mr Tzadik. But, I ain't very impressed by you so far and think you are entirely human, like the rest of us, lol. And certainly with the way you attack and insult people you do not know for simply not agreeing with your opinions and bowing down to you, well that sure as hell ain't god-like.

The crucifix or cross is a very old representation or symbol.

The Crucifix and the Cross are different things. The Crucifix is NOT a 'very old ... symbol', even by the Falsified Chronolgy standards. Nobody was crucified on a crucifix, Robert. The Crucifix is SPECIFICALLY AND ONLY a cross with Jesus on it. Further, I consider the Bible, the Bib of El, to be Saturn based stuff (this ties into the Aztecs and that paranormal stuff over here), and the Cross is nothing more than an unfolded cube - the Cube of Saturn. And while I believe that story was based upon a real person, I don't believe the in the divinity of that person or that he was a man-God. And while born a Virgin Birth (the first recorded C-Section) his conception happened just like every other human's did - as a result of Mommy and Daddy doin' it.

Blah, blah, blah ... let me throw out a bunch of stuff to try to make everyone think I'm super smart and know everything. Blah, blah blah, look at all my books I have written, I'm so super smart and way more awesomer than any of you, blah, blah, blah.

Off to the High Road I go, Robert. Not going to point out your glaring arrogance anymore, or any of the other crap you have been pulling in this thread. And will probably just largely ignore you. Have fun with your continued attacks upon me, calling me a liar, saying I am being evasive, egotistical, have a non-curious mind, etc., for that thick skin of mine is just going to make me giggle about it all, not get all worked up like you seem to be. And let me again remind you that while you seem to think you are the smartest guy in the room here, people are not stupid, like you seem to think, and they don't need me to point out what you are doing, for it is QUITE CLEAR ...
 
Cat Jockey and Robert Baird:
I find your childish contention shocking and appalling.
You all need a time out.
Adult humans acting in this fashion rather than being graceful..:mad:

I don't care who started it, you all need to step back and think about how this posturing makes you look.

Argue facts not people:confused:


I understand where you are coming from, however, I do not appreciate your calling me childish, at all. I am merely trying to defend myself from a whole bunch 'o unwarranted attacks, and Robert and I do NOT share equal blame in this as you are indicating. It ain't me, is it Mr. F? You just got a taste of what Robert was doing to me. Didn't ya? Now, do your responses to him make you childish, too? I don't think so, but if you apply your rules to yourslef that you just did to me, you are going to have to call your self childish too, aren't ya. Guy is out of control - I'm not, and neither are you. Don't include my ass in his antics, thank you very much.

And at this point Mr. F, I think I am just going to log out and find some other forum to hang out on ...
 
And therein lies the truth, the part I bolded. Medieval. We do not know pretty much anything prior to about 1000 AD. All of these, umm, 'ancient' texts of folks like the Roman Historians just all suddenly appeared in the Middle Ages after being lost for centuries.

If we are talking Chinese history:

"Chunqiu, ( Chinese: “Spring and Autumn [Annals]”) Wade-Giles romanization Ch’un-ch’iu," :

The work is a complete—though exceedingly sketchy—month-by-month account of significant events that occurred during the reign of 12 rulers of Lu, the native state of Confucius. The account begins in 722 bc and ends shortly before Confucius’s death (479 bc) *

That is roughly 1500 years before 1000 AD

RE: "All of these, umm, 'ancient' texts of folks like the Roman Historians just all suddenly appeared in the Middle Ages after being lost for centuries."

They did not suddenly appear they were saved or stolen during the Crusades. they were stored in libraries like the one in Constantinople (which was sacked) That is when Western Europeans got their hands on them. In other words they had been looked after by Arab and Orthodox scholars alike in the near East until things kicked off with the arrival of the Crusaders, who took them back home as spoils of war.

They were never lost.
you can only lose something you had in the first place.


*(source): Chunqiu | Confucian text
 
Many books were destroyed and only quotes of them (Poseidonius by Herodotus - and his once thought fictions about Amazons or Sybaris have been archaeologically proven in the last three decades - same with tales of Lao Tzu going west to meet the ancient masters - Urumchi) remain due to the Hellenizing efforts of Empire. But through archaeology and many linguistic studies we have a far truer picture of history today than we did in the Dark Ages and until recently.

DNA and forensic study of mutations on plants has told us a great deal about how long we have been travelling all over this planet. One example I have made before but no fool reads - is Flores Island which we know was over the horizon for two million years and yet artifacts dated to 825,000 years prove man got there - and then years after I had made a big deal of it and Mungo Man genetic knowledge with dwarves - we heard about the hobbit.
 
Let me preface this by thanking you for disagreeing with me sans attacks and insults, lol. Again, this whole thing (the Falsified Chronolgy) is way too large a subject for me to try to prove to anyone on a forum. Keep in mind that Fomenko works at a University, consulted multiple Departments, like History depts on text origins, etc., and you need to keep in mind a dude as smart as Fomenko is going to be more than thorough enough so that his theory will NOT be disproved by someone pointing out something like you are - give his brain ( way smarter than mine) more credit than that. His work 'proving/supporting' his theory is 7 volumes and several thousand pages. It is going to take way, way more thatn what you posted to make a dent in it.

The second part of that preface is for you to understand that you (or Robert) don't even know what the hell you are arguing against. You don't have a clue. You don't have an understanding of the several thousand pages of support for this theory you are arguing against, so, it is kind of hard to argue against that which you do not understand. And that is NOT an insult of any kind. The only way to understand what you are arguing against is to at least read the first volume of the seven. Even just the first would be enough to understand it. And people are only going to be compelled to do that if they are curious enough if they are stimulated by certain things like what I quoted concerning the Bronze Age. That according to people OTHER than Fomenko, people that support the Falsified Chronology (have never questioned it, actually), metallic tin was NOT known during the Bronze Age (bronze is an alloy of copper and tin, so ya need to know about metallic tin to actually make bronze). Think about that issue, Han, for it is a BIG one - that metallic tin was not known in the Bronze Age. People like the guy who wrote a book about the history of chemistry notes such lack of knowledge, and they just scratch their head and say, oh well. Those questions Kasparov raised, that Historians cannot answer, are other things that can arouse that curiosity to look into it further. There are a whole bunch of things, once you start looking, that just don't make sense, according to the Falsified Chronology. Things that might make someone curious enough to at least explore the theory a bit to understand it.

And I only needed to mention and present the basic concept of Fomenko's theory (not argue it or try to prove it), for I tie it into the paranormal stuff over here I still haven't gotten to yet. Nobody has to subscribe to, or even read, the theory, just simply know it is out there and that I subscribe to it, so when I talk about this (North America) being Ophir and King Solomon of the Bible actually being Sulieman the Magnificent, etc., they understand where that is coming from and that I am not simply pulling it out of my rear end. That's all.

Proof for this theory begins with volume one of seven of Fomenko's, not from what will come from my keyboard, and arguing this theory is both off topic and NOT my intent in this thread. And while there is no proving of the theory in that How It Was In Reality link at the bottom of my post, a simple minute or two of reading at least the preface of that online book will be enough to familiarize yourself with it, conceptually, if one so desires.

If we are talking Chinese history:

"Chunqiu, ( Chinese: “Spring and Autumn [Annals]”) Wade-Giles romanization Ch’un-ch’iu," :

The work is a complete—though exceedingly sketchy—month-by-month account of significant events that occurred during the reign of 12 rulers of Lu, the native state of Confucius. The account begins in 722 bc and ends shortly before Confucius’s death (479 bc) *

That is roughly 1500 years before 1000 AD

Not to be a jerk, but that proves nothing, like you think it does.

I could write a complete, non-sketchy (being exceedingly sketchy might make one reconsider presenting it with the confidence you do), month by month history for [insert country/civilization] here going back 10,000 years, if I so choose. And then hand it to you and say, "Here ya go. Here is the complete history of such-and-such going back 10,000 years; therefore, we have PROOF that such-and-such was active, continuously for the last 10,000 years." Wouldn't prove jack, would it? Do you have ANY proof that a dude named Confucius lived when and where told, other than it being written down in an 'original' text (and copied into other literature)? And I ASSURE you that the text you are referring to is not a piece of parchment that is physically almost 2,500 years old.

With this particular text, if you go to Wikipedia, you see a picture of a 19th Century REPLICA. So, Han, where is the original that was supposedly written 2,500 years ago? Or even a copy of that replica written 2,000 years ago? Or a copy of that one written 1,500 years ago? Or one written 1,000 years ago? Etc. Where are they?

Spring and Autumn Annals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This wasn't, for the most part, and accident. Manuscripts were created, intentionally, dates and names (people and geographic) changed to elongate the Chronology, while other manuscripts were sought out and destroyed. And it is Fomenko that places the blame on the shoulder of the Jesuits (I blame the Jesses for a whole bunch of other nefarious deeds, though). And indeed, if his theory is correct, as I believe it is, that is the one group that was quite capable of pulling it off, including forging Chinese stuff. Once they were founded, the Jesuits ended up EVERYWHERE, pretty immediately, including China/Japan. Let alone the Ventian ties to places like that via the Silk Road, etc. And then, of course, multiple expulsions from multiple countries for their meddling, and ultimate, but temporary disbandment by the Pope

I say what you are pointing out is a forgery. My saying that certainly doesn't in of itself,make it true, but you cannot prove it is an original work of that era, either, only claim and choose to believe that it is.

They did not suddenly appear they were saved or stolen during the Crusades. they were stored in libraries like the one in Constantinople (which was sacked) That is when Western Europeans got their hands on them. In other words they had been looked after by Arab and Orthodox scholars alike in the near East until things kicked off with the arrival of the Crusaders, who took them back home as spoils of war.

They most certainly did suddenly appear. The Plato example I used is a prime one, for it his works were 'lost for centuries' TWICE. Once revived, supposedly, in like 200-300 AD (whatever I quoted previously), and then with Gemisto pulling the 'ol, "look what the hell I found in Byzantine - let's 'revive' Plato and call ourselves neo-Platonists.

Can you provide proof of this? That these works were continuously known about? NO, you cannot. You are just making a claim. Repeating a story. The actual First Crusade was what we know of as the Fourth Crusade, the attack upon Constantinople, and it was in response to the crucifixion of the Emperor Andronicus (Julius Caesar is a relfection of this guy - same person, just retold with changed name and place. I mentioned Kiev being a capital; C-zar/Caesar, hmm...). There was no city or Temple Mount in what we call Israel in 1100. Didn't exist. It was a fabrication of the 1500-1700's.

And these books you are referring to, well, do you have a continuous catalogue of them and where they were and when? Do you actually know what books you are claiming were never lost and were 'rescued' in the Crusades? No.

They were never lost. you can only lose something you had in the first place.

They most definitely were lost. That is according to the Falsfied Chronology.

It is okay to disagree with me, however, yes they were 'lost', these ancient texts, most definitely the ones I am referring to. You should look into that particular history. These 'ancient' manuscripts just showed up in the Middle Ages/Renaissance era. I am not being insulting when I say you do not know the actual history of said manuscripts if you think they were continuously known about from, say, the fall of Rome up until 1400. They weren't. People in 1200, certainly in Europe, had no idea of their existence. Many of them, again if you actually look into the history of each individual manuscript, just 'showed up' with the corresponding, "hey, look what I found."

You need to understand that neither you, nor most others have ever traced the History of the manuscripts and works of people like Mantheo. Assumptions are made, and nothing more. According the to the Falsified Chronology, not Fomeko, they MOST DEFINITELY were 'lost for centuries'. You are going to have to talk to specialized PhDs to know this, though. I haven't had such chats, but people like Fomenko have.

As far as Chinese History, same thing. You are pointing to things/documents you know of in 2015 that have dates of thousands of years ago and then making the leap, without warrant, of, "see, you are wrong." What I am saying is that these Histories you are referring to in order to say I am wrong were manufactured 1500's +/-.

If I wrote a book and dated it 1765, and you read it, would it mean it was written in 1765? Of course not.

Let me quote Fomenko from his first volume one more time:

The framework of the global Scaligerian [Falsified] chronology was constructed as a result of the analysis of the chronological indications given by the ancient sources. It is natural that the issue of their origin should be of interest in this respect. Modern histography manifests the paucity of evidence in what concerns the genesis of such "ancient" manuscripts. The general observation is made that the overwhelming majority of these documents surfaced surfaced during the renaissance epoch that allegedly superseded the "dark ages." The discovery of manuscripts often happened under circumstances that forbade the analysis which could allow the critical dating of such findings.

In the XIX century two prominent historians, Hochart and Ross, had published the results of their research proving that the famous "ancient Roman History by Cornelius Tactius was really written by the well-known Italian humanist Poggio Bracciolini ([21], [1195], and [1379]). The publications occurred in the years 1882-1885 and 1878; the interested readers may turn their attention to [21], which covers this problem exhaustively. We should just note that we deem the History by Tacitus to be an edited original - that is, a partial forgery and not a complete one. However, the events related in the History have been misdated and transposed far back in time. The History of the discovery of Tacitus' books really provokes a great many questions ([21]). It was Poggio who had discovered and published the opuses of Quintillian, Valerius Flaccus, Ansconius Pedianus, Nonius Marcellus, Probus, some tractates by Cicero, Lucretius, Petronius, Plautus, Tertullian, Marcellinus, Calpurn Seculus, etc. ([21]). The circumstances of these discoveries and their datings have never been related in detail. See more about the history of Tacitus' books in Chron1, chapter 7.

In the XV century famous humanists such as Manuel Chrysolorus, Gemisto Pleton, Bessarion of Nicea and some others, came to Italy. They were the first ones to familiarize Europe with the achievements of "ancient Greek thought." Byzantium gave the West almost all of the known "ancient" Greek manuscripts [no, Han, this does not prove your point - it helps mine about how this stuff just started showing up in Europe from 1400 onward]. Otto Neugebauer wrote that "the major part of the manuscripts that our knowledge of the Greek science is based upon consists of COPIES [my emphasis] made 500-1500 years after the death of their authors" ([571], page 69).

According to the Scaligerian [Falsified] history ([120]), the entire "Classical ancient" literature only surfaced during the Renaissance. In most cases, a detailed analysis shows us that the obscurity of the literature's origins and the lack of documentation concerning its passage through the so-called "Dark Ages" leads one to suspect that none of theses texts really existed before the dawn of the renaissance ([544]).


For instance, the oldest copies of the so-called incomplete collection of Cicero's texts are said to be the copies allegedly made in the IX-X century A.D. However, one instantly finds out that the archetype of the incomplete collection "had perished a long time ago" ([949]). The XIV-XV century witness a surge of interest in Cicero, so:

"Finally, about 1420 the Milanese professor Gasparino Barzizza … decided to undertake a rather precarious endeavor of filling the gaps in the incomplete collection with his own writings for the sake of consequentiality [!-A.F.]. However, before he could finish this volume of work, a miracle occurred: a forlorn manuscript with the complete text of all the rhetorical works of Cicero's becomes unearthed in a parochial Italian town by the name of Lodi …"


How convenient, eh? Lol.

I was losing faith, Han. I had one guy attacking me, one talking to me, a 43 year old man, like I am his kid, telling me that I am childish and needed a time out (umm, yea). But you, combined with UFOlogy, have brought that faith back to me that the other two are not representative of the whole of the community here. And I would like to NO LONGER argue Fomenko's theory with you or anyone, especially since none of you have even looked into it or understand the first damn thing about what you are arguing against, but present some of my ideas about what is going on over here with some of the paranormal stuff and folks coming in from the West in medieval times, as mentioned in the original post.

If that is cool with folks ...
 
Last edited:
You are barking or baying at the moon and have no idea of what I have done or what Fomenko did not understand. Here are some free books for you to read - when you are through reading them you can go to the title in your browser and see a thread with another hundred books you need to read - BEFORE you can begin to make any sense.

The Golden Bough and More
Given that Thoth/Hermes is Gnostic we are invited to further peruse or abuse ourselves in mythology by seeking answers for what Danaus founded Greece and those Assyrians or Chatti who as the Hyksos returned many times to Egypt and other colonies in the Phoenician Brotherhood which included Nubians even at the late date of the Punic Wars with Rome. Professor Bernal's masterwork titled Black Athena is a great alternative to the usual classical pablum as well.

This first book was written around the time of Flinders-Petrie and that does not mean we cannot glean information of value in it.

https://archive.org/stream/lifeinanc...auoft_djvu.txt
No student of human cultural roots can go without The Golden Bough.

https://archive.org/stream/goldenbou...zuoft_djvu.txt
And you would be hard pressed to disagree that religion was far more real and less fanciful in ancient times after reading this excerpt from a noted historian. How did we sink so low as to debase ourselves to mythical aliens and gods?


"It is unfortunate that every other word for supernatural intelligences has become debased, so that we cannot well speak of demons, devils, ghosts, or fairies without implying a noxious or a trifling meaning, quite unsuited to the ancient deities that were so beneficent and powerful. If then we use the word god for such conceptions, it must always {2} be with the reservation that the word has now a very different meaning from what it had to ancient minds.

To the Egyptian the gods might be mortal; even Ra, the sun-god, is said to have grown old and feeble, Osiris was slain, and Orion, the great hunter of the heavens, killed and ate the gods. The mortality of gods has been dwelt on by Dr. Frazer (Golden Bough), and the many instances of tombs of gods, and of the slaying of the deified man who was worshipped, all show that immortality was not a divine attribute."

http://www.hotfreebooks.com/book/The...rs-Petrie.html
This one might cost a little. But her work is that of a maverick as well.

http://book.burgayocoffee.com/book/9...s-of-early-man
Then we have Marija Gimbutas!!! It almost brings us to where you will have to pay for learning some truth.

I am not sure this one is totally free but there are 42 of Marija Gimbutas's books available in various places.

http://siuman.djagal.com/download-bo...e_Goddess.html
http://campbellwellmannews.com/pdf/i...ok-1956231991/
 
Let me preface this by thanking you for disagreeing with me sans attacks and insults, lol. Again, this whole thing (the Falsified Chronolgy) is way too large a subject for me to try to prove to anyone on a forum. Keep in mind that Fomenko works at a University, consulted multiple Departments, like History depts on text origins, etc., and you need to keep in mind a dude as smart as Fomenko is going to be more than thorough enough so that his theory will NOT be disproved by someone pointing out something like you are - give his brain ( way smarter than mine) more credit than that. His work 'proving/supporting' his theory is 7 volumes and several thousand pages. It is going to take way, way more thatn what you posted to make a dent in it.

The second part of that preface is for you to understand that you (or Robert) don't even know what the hell you are arguing against. You don't have a clue. You don't have an understanding of the several thousand pages of support for this theory you are arguing against, so, it is kind of hard to argue against that which you do not understand. And that is NOT an insult of any kind. The only way to understand what you are arguing against is to at least read the first volume of the seven. Even just the first would be enough to understand it. And people are only going to be compelled to do that if they are curious enough if they are stimulated by certain things like what I quoted concerning the Bronze Age. That according to people OTHER than Fomenko, people that support the Falsified Chronology (have never questioned it, actually), metallic tin was NOT known during the Bronze Age (bronze is an alloy of copper and tin, so ya need to know about metallic tin to actually make bronze). Think about that issue, Han, for it is a BIG one - that metallic tin was not known in the Bronze Age. People like the guy who wrote a book about the history of chemistry notes such lack of knowledge, and they just scratch their head and say, oh well. Those questions Kasparov raised, that Historians cannot answer, are other things that can arouse that curiosity to look into it further. There are a whole bunch of things, once you start looking, that just don't make sense, according to the Falsified Chronology. Things that might make someone curious enough to at least explore the theory a bit to understand it.

And I only needed to mention and present the basic concept of Fomenko's theory (not argue it or try to prove it), for I tie it into the paranormal stuff over here I still haven't gotten to yet. Nobody has to subscribe to, or even read, the theory, just simply know it is out there and that I subscribe to it, so when I talk about this (North America) being Ophir and King Solomon of the Bible actually being Sulieman the Magnificent, etc., they understand where that is coming from and that I am not simply pulling it out of my rear end. That's all.

Proof for this theory begins with volume one of seven of Fomenko's, not from what will come from my keyboard, and arguing this theory is both off topic and NOT my intent in this thread. And while there is no proving of the theory in that How It Was In Reality link at the bottom of my post, a simple minute or two of reading at least the preface of that online book will be enough to familiarize yourself with it, conceptually, if one so desires.



Not to be a jerk, but that proves nothing, like you think it does.

I could write a complete, non-sketchy (being exceedingly sketchy might make one reconsider presenting it with the confidence you do), month by month history for [insert country/civilization] here going back 10,000 years, if I so choose. And then hand it to you and say, "Here ya go. Here is the complete history of such-and-such going back 10,000 years; therefore, we have PROOF that such-and-such was active, continuously for the last 10,000 years." Wouldn't prove jack, would it? Do you have ANY proof that a dude named Confucius lived when and where told, other than it being written down in an 'original' text (and copied into other literature)? And I ASSURE you that the text you are referring to is not a piece of parchment that is physically almost 2,500 years old.

With this particular text, if you go to Wikipedia, you see a picture of a 19th Century REPLICA. So, Han, where is the original that was supposedly written 2,500 years ago? Or even a copy of that replica written 2,000 years ago? Or a copy of that one written 1,500 years ago? Or one written 1,000 years ago? Etc. Where are they?

Spring and Autumn Annals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This wasn't, for the most part, and accident. Manuscripts were created, intentionally, dates and names (people and geographic) changed to elongate the Chronology, while other manuscripts were sought out and destroyed. And it is Fomenko that places the blame on the shoulder of the Jesuits (I blame the Jesses for a whole bunch of other nefarious deeds, though). And indeed, if his theory is correct, as I believe it is, that is the one group that was quite capable of pulling it off, including forging Chinese stuff. Once they were founded, the Jesuits ended up EVERYWHERE, pretty immediately, including China/Japan. Let alone the Ventian ties to places like that via the Silk Road, etc. And then, of course, multiple expulsions from multiple countries for their meddling, and ultimate, but temporary disbandment by the Pope

I say what you are pointing out is a forgery. My saying that certainly doesn't in of itself,make it true, but you cannot prove it is an original work of that era, either, only claim and choose to believe that it is.



They most certainly did suddenly appear. The Plato example I used is a prime one, for it his works were 'lost for centuries' TWICE. Once revived, supposedly, in like 200-300 AD (whatever I quoted previously), and then with Gemisto pulling the 'ol, "look what the hell I found in Byzantine - let's 'revive' Plato and call ourselves neo-Platonists.

Can you provide proof of this? That these works were continuously known about? NO, you cannot. You are just making a claim. Repeating a story. The actual First Crusade was what we know of as the Fourth Crusade, the attack upon Constantinople, and it was in response to the crucifixion of the Emperor Andronicus (Julius Caesar is a relfection of this guy - same person, just retold with changed name and place. I mentioned Kiev being a capital; C-zar/Caesar, hmm...). There was no city or Temple Mount in what we call Israel in 1100. Didn't exist. It was a fabrication of the 1500-1700's.

And these books you are referring to, well, do you have a continuous catalogue of them and where they were and when? Do you actually know what books you are claiming were never lost and were 'rescued' in the Crusades? No.



They most definitely were lost. That is according to the Falsfied Chronology.

It is okay to disagree with me, however, yes they were 'lost', these ancient texts, most definitely the ones I am referring to. You should look into that particular history. These 'ancient' manuscripts just showed up in the Middle Ages/Renaissance era. I am not being insulting when I say you do not know the actual history of said manuscripts if you think they were continuously known about from, say, the fall of Rome up until 1400. They weren't. People in 1200, certainly in Europe, had no idea of their existence. Many of them, again if you actually look into the history of each individual manuscript, just 'showed up' with the corresponding, "hey, look what I found."

You need to understand that neither you, nor most others have ever traced the History of the manuscripts and works of people like Mantheo. Assumptions are made, and nothing more. According the to the Falsified Chronology, not Fomeko, they MOST DEFINITELY were 'lost for centuries'. You are going to have to talk to specialized PhDs to know this, though. I haven't had such chats, but people like Fomenko have.

As far as Chinese History, same thing. You are pointing to things/documents you know of in 2015 that have dates of thousands of years ago and then making the leap, without warrant, of, "see, you are wrong." What I am saying is that these Histories you are referring to in order to say I am wrong were manufactured 1500's +/-.

If I wrote a book and dated it 1765, and you read it, would it mean it was written in 1765? Of course not.

Let me quote Fomenko from his first volume one more time:

The framework of the global Scaligerian [Falsified] chronology was constructed as a result of the analysis of the chronological indications given by the ancient sources. It is natural that the issue of their origin should be of interest in this respect. Modern histography manifests the paucity of evidence in what concerns the genesis of such "ancient" manuscripts. The general observation is made that the overwhelming majority of these documents surfaced surfaced during the renaissance epoch that allegedly superseded the "dark ages." The discovery of manuscripts often happened under circumstances that forbade the analysis which could allow the critical dating of such findings.

In the XIX century two prominent historians, Hochart and Ross, had published the results of their research proving that the famous "ancient Roman History by Cornelius Tactius was really written by the well-known Italian humanist Poggio Bracciolini ([21], [1195], and [1379]). The publications occurred in the years 1882-1885 and 1878; the interested readers may turn their attention to [21], which covers this problem exhaustively. We should just note that we deem the History by Tacitus to be an edited original - that is, a partial forgery and not a complete one. However, the events related in the History have been misdated and transposed far back in time. The History of the discovery of Tacitus' books really provokes a great many questions ([21]). It was Poggio who had discovered and published the opuses of Quintillian, Valerius Flaccus, Ansconius Pedianus, Nonius Marcellus, Probus, some tractates by Cicero, Lucretius, Petronius, Plautus, Tertullian, Marcellinus, Calpurn Seculus, etc. ([21]). The circumstances of these discoveries and their datings have never been related in detail. See more about the history of Tacitus' books in Chron1, chapter 7.

In the XV century famous humanists such as Manuel Chrysolorus, Gemisto Pleton, Bessarion of Nicea and some others, came to Italy. They were the first ones to familiarize Europe with the achievements of "ancient Greek thought." Byzantium gave the West almost all of the known "ancient" Greek manuscripts [no, Han, this does not prove your point - it helps mine about how this stuff just started showing up in Europe from 1400 onward]. Otto Neugebauer wrote that "the major part of the manuscripts that our knowledge of the Greek science is based upon consists of COPIES [my emphasis] made 500-1500 years after the death of their authors" ([571], page 69).

According to the Scaligerian [Falsified] history ([120]), the entire "Classical ancient" literature only surfaced during the Renaissance. In most cases, a detailed analysis shows us that the obscurity of the literature's origins and the lack of documentation concerning its passage through the so-called "Dark Ages" leads one to suspect that none of theses texts really existed before the dawn of the renaissance ([544]).


For instance, the oldest copies of the so-called incomplete collection of Cicero's texts are said to be the copies allegedly made in the IX-X century A.D. However, one instantly finds out that the archetype of the incomplete collection "had perished a long time ago" ([949]). The XIV-XV century witness a surge of interest in Cicero, so:

"Finally, about 1420 the Milanese professor Gasparino Barzizza … decided to undertake a rather precarious endeavor of filling the gaps in the incomplete collection with his own writings for the sake of consequentiality [!-A.F.]. However, before he could finish this volume of work, a miracle occurred: a forlorn manuscript with the complete text of all the rhetorical works of Cicero's becomes unearthed in a parochial Italian town by the name of Lodi …"


How convenient, eh? Lol.

I was losing faith, Han. I had one guy attacking me, one talking to me, a 43 year old man, like I am his kid, telling me that I am childish and needed a time out (umm, yea). But you, combined with UFOlogy, have brought that faith back to me that the other two are not representative of the whole of the community here. And I would like to NO LONGER argue Fomenko's theory with you or anyone, especially since none of you have even looked into it or understand the first damn thing about what you are arguing against, but present some of my ideas about what is going on over here with some of the paranormal stuff and folks coming in from the West in medieval times, as mentioned in the original post.

If that is cool with folks ...


Firstly I would like to say that that I am acutely aware that History is a tool, it can be used for good and bad.
Secondly I admit that I have not read the work of Fomenko's theory and or work.
Thirdly I am glad that we disagree, it is always good to question everything.

Now on to my reasons for believing that Ancient texts could be and were preserved and protected:

I will start out by saying that if it was just texts that survived I would be highly suspicious, especially when they were "found" by people with dubious motives, however the Architecture of Ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome is covered in writing, not to mention all the mundane everyday items.
There is a vast amount of ancient writing that has survived.
In the case of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs they were undecipherable until the discovery of the Rosetta stone.
Ancient Greek and Latin never completely died out.

I don't want to use the tactic of flooding the thread with text so I will try to limit myself to a few examples:

(I am going to use wikipedia examples for convenience)

#1 The Bath Curse Tablets: I choose these because they were only discovered in the 1970s and are pagan:

Bath curse tablets - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#2 Oxyrhynchus Papyri: Discovered in 1896 and is basically a Rubbish tip and many of the texts are Pagan:

Oxyrhynchus Papyri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#3 Linear B Tablets: Acquired from Greece in the 19th Century and are Pagan:

Linear B - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#4 Chinese Oracle Bones: Discovered in the 19th Century and are Pagan:

Oracle bone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#5 the recently re-discovered Leather Manuscript from Ancient Egypt and is Pagan:

"The oldest Egyptian leather manuscript has been found in the shelves of the Egyptian museum in Cairo, where it was stored and forgotten for more than 70 years.


Dating from the late Old Kingdom to the early Middle Kingdom (2300-2000 B.C.), the roll measures about 2.5 meters(8.2 feet) and is filled with texts and colorful drawings of the finest quality."


Oldest, Longest Ancient Egyptian Leather Manuscript Found : DNews


All of the examples above were not discovered in the middle ages and are all non Christian i.e Pagan.


And now back to Ufology: You might already be aware of this but I think it is important to mention it just in case:

A certain Swiss Farmer called Billy Meir claims to have found an ancient manuscript, called the "Talmud of Jmmanuel" which he says is now lost! (it's ok he remembers most of it ;) )
Whilst I do not believe it for a nano second, I can see how he has used the tactics described by you in relation to the Jesuits.

Unfortunately people do rewrite History for their own convenience and goals, but my belief is that there is such a wealth of supporting evidence, that at least some of the Ancient Texts have survived.

Finally I just want to say that I think that one of the reasons others did not get involved in this thread earlier was: the volume of text posted (myself included). I still haven't read it all. This is not aimed at you personally, I just find it difficult when people choose to flood a thread with reams and reams of other peoples work, I would much prefer to read peoples own opinions. Posting links rather than quoting blocks of text keeps the thread tidier and easier to manage.

Now Back to the original thread topic "Did the Ancient Chinese make contact with Native Americans" I believe that they did, I think that the "new" world is not new at all, I don't think the Ancient Chinese were alone in this, I think that it went both ways, I think it is more important to ask why couldn't the Ancient Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks, Phoenicians etc get to the Americas? and Vice Versa. Personally I see more reasons why they could than couldn't, Humans are tough and have learned to survive in the most extreme of conditions. Proving it, is another story.
 
Chinesepict.jpg

To stay focused on the pictoglyph thing a bit, I definitely see some resemblance, I also see quite the 'stretch' being made. Like with D (this one strikes me as a large stretch-to-fit-theory; I don't really see the resemblance), C, A. And the first part of E can be called a Venus Cross (common in the SW), too, instead of a Chinese character. I don't go around insulting academics (Historians and Archaeologists, in this case) as a matter of course, and do respect their intellectual capacities and time and effort they spend in their lives devoted to such things, but when you look at Academia's opinion of things like the pyramids in Egypt and 'who' built them, their take on the megalithic structures in South America, etc., well it seems pretty obvious to many of us that those sheepskins don't necessarily mean as much as they think.

The majority of PhDs will claim that the pyramids were a tomb, built with ropes and dirt ramps and that the Incas manged to pull off the spectacular rock work in SA with copper chisels. I think many of us believe that is utter nonsense. But, because said PhDs are institutionalized (controlled), that is the result - you get smart people making really silly/stupid claims that are actually laughable. You won't get awarded a PhD if you suggest otherwise, though, nor will you be given grants, etc. Just from glancing at this pic, I might put Dr. Ruskamp in that same category - an academic who's thought process is constrained upon the issue; therefore he tries to force a square peg through a round hole.

Pretty much every pictoglyph you come across in the SW/West is ALWAYS attributed by academics to some Native American culture (Ruskamp is obviously breaking the mold a bit here and going with the Chinese, but only breaking the mold so much). What most don't consider/know is that some of these pictoglyphs throughout the SW/West were made by white dudes. And they were made in regards to a marking system to identify the location of buried treasure. Outlandish sounding? I have never seen the movie National Treasure 2, but I know it dealt with the subject of the Knights of the Golden Circle. I feel pretty confident in saying that if you have seen that movie, throw whatever was presented about the KGC in the trash - for it is Hollywoodized. And done so intentionally to spread disinfo about the subject, or innocently in the form of a screen writer coming across a little info on the KGC and saying, "Hey, I could write a pretty cool fictional movie script incorporating those KGC dudes, and then maybe sell it to Disney."

But, the KGC was a very real thing, as were their activities in caching gold (gold from the mining field,s to gold stolen from trains, to deposits of gold coins up to a bout $1,000 face value - today, $1,000 in $20 gold pieces is worth a helluva lot more than $1,000). They were also themselves Treasure Hunters. Looking for previously buried caches of gold/silver (mostly gold). These caches can be traced back to the Aztecs and the Templars. And others.

And herein lies the actual tie-in to the paranormal (pre-KGC caches placed by Aztec Priest and/or Templars) that I will delve into a bit more.

This is Ophir, North America. The Biblical King Solomon is actually Sulieman the Magnificent, and Solomon's Temple still stands today in Istanbul - it is called the Hagia Sophia. Further, Hiram Abiff (the guy making the trips to Ophir for Solomon) should actually be called something like Hiram Abifiratti, or something Italian sounding, for that tale (Biblical and Masonic) is based upon Venetian (potentially Genoese) maritime concerns. Over here is where the Templars acquired their vast wealth out of thin air, in the mines of the Southwest and West (Four corners States, Nevada, Cali, etc.). And that is why I had to introduce Fomenko's stuff a bit - things like the Old Testament being a rendition of events occurring in Europe/Eurasia post 1100AD, etc., for he is the one that makes the connection that Solomon is a retelling and slight name change of the real dude, Sulieman (Fomenko doesn't touch the Ophir stuff, or anything like that, though).

When it comes to the topic of diffusionism, I absolutely subscribe to the notion that NA was approached from the West first, not the Atlantic side. But, it is limited to within the last 1,000 years. Including the Egyptian influences, etc. Egypt I consider to be nothing more than the Royal Graveyard of The Empire, and the Empire was not responsible for the pyramids, but it is pretty easy to come along and chisel up with hieroglyphs a bunch of sandstone/granite monuments that are pre-existing. Some of those ceremonies made it over here, including the mummy stuff. A reported 1909 discover in the Grand Canyon is circumstantial evidence I apply to this.

I mentioned that nobody seems to raise an eyebrow about the fact that the Anasazi just seemed to up and disappear right about the same time the Aztecs just kind of showed up out of nowhere, from there northern homeland, Azatlan. I am working a theory, also, that ties Azatlan to the SLV. Azatlan - home of the cranes. The SLV, where every year in Monte Vista, the annual Crane Festival is still held as they migrate. There is a reservoir in South Park (a Bit north of the SLV) that is only like 10-15 feet deep, because the land is so flat. The SLV is quite flat, too. A minor climate change can take a land of a large, but shallow, lake and dry it up in a matter of a few decades. And then a few centuries of a persistent wind acting upon the dry lake bed (sand), and you get cool places to go visit like the Great Sand Dunes National Monument, NW of Alamosa.

On the Pacific approach and then Anasazi/Aztec connection, consider this with the Na-Dene language group, the largest single group speaking this language today being the Navajo:

616px-Na-Dene_langs.png

It seems to look like the Navajo were 'split off' and came down south - perhaps an 'enemy form the north'. Was this on their own, or did they come down with a group that traversed the Bearing/Pacific? I would suggest the latter.

If you look at the Uto-Aztecan language, well, it implies the Aztecs coming down from the North, perhaps around the Four Corners area?:

Uto-Aztecan_langs.png

Things I ponder ...

I'm struggling to figure out how to present all of this so that I remain on topic and concise with all of this - let me think about it for a bit, and I'll figure out a way to present it all in 2-4 posts so I can make sense to people (even if they don't accept my theory, at least they will understand it, lol).
Excellent post!
 
Back
Top