"Architect claims to solve pyramid secret"
- Thread starter Toro
- Start date
That's bullshit, they'll never figure out how these people built that, Khufu commissioned to have the pyramid built over a 20 year period. I believe it was the Japanese who attempted a full scale replication of building the pyramid with the same limited resources. They could barely get past the foundation, and it got to the point where they had to cheat and use 20th century technology. Even then they gave up and was left with a small, uneven, tilted pyramid. The fact of the matter is, these people were extremely smart and their technology was already many generations in the making.. This is lost knowledge..
It is now, but not with old kingdom resources. We're talking about a 481 foot equilateral pyramid. The pyramid is near to exactly aligned to the four cardinal points. Top to bottom covered in limestone, stones fitted to precision, so much so that you can't even fit a penny in between the steps and steeps. I'd also welcome anyone to try and do it themselves..
It's also hard to take him seriously if this is what he really said..
"the builders put up an outer ramp for the first 140 feet, then constructed an inner ramp in a corkscrew shape to complete the 450-foot structure."
^The Pyramid was initially 481 feet (not 450) after its inception. He'd have to account for the extra 31 feet also before he starts screaming victory!
http://www.geocities.com/athens/academy/7357/builders.htm
"the builders put up an outer ramp for the first 140 feet, then constructed an inner ramp in a corkscrew shape to complete the 450-foot structure."
^The Pyramid was initially 481 feet (not 450) after its inception. He'd have to account for the extra 31 feet also before he starts screaming victory!
http://www.geocities.com/athens/academy/7357/builders.htm
The Pyramids are with a doubt the most mysterious wonders of the world.
Ask yourself this question.. We can find many ancient things but we cannot find anything that will explain how they were built, why is this?
The most common answer is just 'they had superior technology back then and lost it'
If so, why were'nt smaller buildings, houses ect done in the same way?
Could it be that they were built by something other than humans??
Ask yourself this question.. We can find many ancient things but we cannot find anything that will explain how they were built, why is this?
The most common answer is just 'they had superior technology back then and lost it'
If so, why were'nt smaller buildings, houses ect done in the same way?
Could it be that they were built by something other than humans??
Hmm, I never heard that, but seeing as how Vedic is an Indo-Aryan script from India I find that extremely hard to believe and accept. Kush had cultural continuity with the Kingdom of Kerma, and before that, Ta-Seti, which stretches back to 4,500 B.C., older than Egypt and India. So I find that hard to believe (Kush was an indigenous development), maybe they traded with Kush, which actually is well-known. Also, Dravidians in India have similar stories of that nature, they have legends that tell of a conquest of Ethiopia, and that they have very ancient cultural ties. There's just no evidence for it and Ethiopia (to my knowledge) has never been conquered, I mean like never.. I am open minded though, that's a big coincidence, there had to be some kind of contact..
And I will have to disagree. It was not called India back in 4500 B.C. but the Vedic culture was there.
Well, one thing that doesn't seem to fit is if the name Kush came later than 4500 B.C. According to the Vedic histories, King Ramachandra lived over 1.5 million years ago. It was known as the age of Treta, wherein a person lived an average of 10,000 years. I am not sure at what point Rama had His son Kush, but you can imagine that it was long, long ago; prehistoric, mind you.
The modern historians and anthropologists, of course, think in terms of an evolution model wherein humanity is much younger than is admitted in these texts. Too much speculation if you ask me. There is indication that the places we now call India and Egypt, as well as other places all over the world, were united in a single culture. That is the Vedic version of history. Also, the idea that current technological advancement is as high as it has ever been in history is wrong. Time is cyclical. There have been past ages of humanity that had similar and even better technologies. There is indication, for example, that atomic weapons were used during the Mahabharat war. The explanation of a weapon that causes people to get sick, and hair & nails fall out is explained in the Mahabharat text itself. Say hello to radiation poisoning. I imagine you have read things on ancient aircraft because much of it pertains to Egypt. On that note, flying machines called Vimanas are described in Vedic texts. Actually, there is one text that is written like an operator's manual for how to fly one.
By the way, I posted a video in the video section about Vedic knowledge and showing how it is scientifically verified. They do not go into the link between India and Egypt so much, but it is still an interesting half hour video. Check it out when you have the time.
Well, one thing that doesn't seem to fit is if the name Kush came later than 4500 B.C. According to the Vedic histories, King Ramachandra lived over 1.5 million years ago. It was known as the age of Treta, wherein a person lived an average of 10,000 years. I am not sure at what point Rama had His son Kush, but you can imagine that it was long, long ago; prehistoric, mind you.
The modern historians and anthropologists, of course, think in terms of an evolution model wherein humanity is much younger than is admitted in these texts. Too much speculation if you ask me. There is indication that the places we now call India and Egypt, as well as other places all over the world, were united in a single culture. That is the Vedic version of history. Also, the idea that current technological advancement is as high as it has ever been in history is wrong. Time is cyclical. There have been past ages of humanity that had similar and even better technologies. There is indication, for example, that atomic weapons were used during the Mahabharat war. The explanation of a weapon that causes people to get sick, and hair & nails fall out is explained in the Mahabharat text itself. Say hello to radiation poisoning. I imagine you have read things on ancient aircraft because much of it pertains to Egypt. On that note, flying machines called Vimanas are described in Vedic texts. Actually, there is one text that is written like an operator's manual for how to fly one.
By the way, I posted a video in the video section about Vedic knowledge and showing how it is scientifically verified. They do not go into the link between India and Egypt so much, but it is still an interesting half hour video. Check it out when you have the time.
And I'd have to in turn, disagree. Vedic culture and the Vedic script is no more than 4500 years old..
"The Vedic Period is dimmed by obscurity, but it may be placed approximately between 2500 and 600 B.C"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas
India before that was ran by Dravidian people who spoke Dravidian languages and they're responsible for India's earliest Indus Valley civilization (which had no relationship to any Vedic kings that were yet to have come). Even given that, the Indus Valley Civilization its self only dates back to 3300 B.C...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilization
The thing about that, the name Kush neither comes from Egypt or the Nubians them selves, it's a biblical reference, one of the sons of Ham (Cush), from whence we get the name. It isn't related to Vedic, it's an Afro-Asiatic name.. Not to mention any claims that hold someone to have lived 1.5 million years automatically is subject to criticism on validity and detail.
This type of thinking will never pass the test of "Occam's razor".. There is nothing to indicate that this is true, and if anything, according to Bruce Williams, Basil Davidson, and advances in archeology, evidence actually points to a distinct unified culture in the Nile valley (Egypt, Nubia, the Sahara) with limited outside influence in its development. India had no known connection to Egypt and the Nile valley in early antiquity. The evolution model doesn't really apply here, I'm not even an evolutionist, but I find no evidence for Atlantis, or any other huge lost unified cultures. Linguistics, archeology, and anthropology all point to the same conclusions.
Again, this doesn't pass the test of "Occam's razor"... The evidence that we do have gives us an indication of how things were in the past, regardless of how accurate or detailed it may or may not truly be, this is the information that we have to work with. I'm also aware of ancient technologies like copper batteries found in ancient Iraq, and models of flying machines in Egypt, but what am I to make of this information with out assuming something that I have no evidence for? I only have faith in God, not legends.. Many different legends from different cultures contradict each other..
I'll watch it, things like that are extremely interesting, I'm reading a book right now called "Science Of The Dogon", and the same claims are made about scientific knowledge. I do find a lot of it compelling, and I do believe that they attained certain knowledge that we previously figured was unattainable to them. How'd they get the knowledge though? Who knows, if I were to take the Dogon literally I'd have to believe that they got their knowledge from a reptilian/aquatic race of beings from the Sirius star system (Sirius B to be exact). Who knows though, that may be true? Or can it be? We'd be forced to assume, or have faith in their word.. Details get obscured over time...
"The Vedic Period is dimmed by obscurity, but it may be placed approximately between 2500 and 600 B.C"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas
India before that was ran by Dravidian people who spoke Dravidian languages and they're responsible for India's earliest Indus Valley civilization (which had no relationship to any Vedic kings that were yet to have come). Even given that, the Indus Valley Civilization its self only dates back to 3300 B.C...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilization
The thing about that, the name Kush neither comes from Egypt or the Nubians them selves, it's a biblical reference, one of the sons of Ham (Cush), from whence we get the name. It isn't related to Vedic, it's an Afro-Asiatic name.. Not to mention any claims that hold someone to have lived 1.5 million years automatically is subject to criticism on validity and detail.
This type of thinking will never pass the test of "Occam's razor".. There is nothing to indicate that this is true, and if anything, according to Bruce Williams, Basil Davidson, and advances in archeology, evidence actually points to a distinct unified culture in the Nile valley (Egypt, Nubia, the Sahara) with limited outside influence in its development. India had no known connection to Egypt and the Nile valley in early antiquity. The evolution model doesn't really apply here, I'm not even an evolutionist, but I find no evidence for Atlantis, or any other huge lost unified cultures. Linguistics, archeology, and anthropology all point to the same conclusions.
Again, this doesn't pass the test of "Occam's razor"... The evidence that we do have gives us an indication of how things were in the past, regardless of how accurate or detailed it may or may not truly be, this is the information that we have to work with. I'm also aware of ancient technologies like copper batteries found in ancient Iraq, and models of flying machines in Egypt, but what am I to make of this information with out assuming something that I have no evidence for? I only have faith in God, not legends.. Many different legends from different cultures contradict each other..
I'll watch it, things like that are extremely interesting, I'm reading a book right now called "Science Of The Dogon", and the same claims are made about scientific knowledge. I do find a lot of it compelling, and I do believe that they attained certain knowledge that we previously figured was unattainable to them. How'd they get the knowledge though? Who knows, if I were to take the Dogon literally I'd have to believe that they got their knowledge from a reptilian/aquatic race of beings from the Sirius star system (Sirius B to be exact). Who knows though, that may be true? Or can it be? We'd be forced to assume, or have faith in their word.. Details get obscured over time...
All I can say is that this is imperfect speculation. "Dimmed by obscurity" is a dead give away of this.
Also, the notion that Dravidians are entirely separate from Vedic culture is incorrect.
Then I guess it is just an incredible coincidence that ancient Vedic texts explain that King Rama (pronounced often as Ram - perhaps 'Rham') had a son named Kush who ruled over part of the African continent. Obviously, the Ham spoken of in the Bible fits within a time span of a mere 6,000 years. So the time factor is still an issue. Perhaps they both just used similar names, or there is always the chance that people pieced some of the Bible together by taking parts of historical accounts and fashioning them to fit into a young earth scenario. I think we both agree that the earth is much older than Christianity would have us believe. So you tell me what is more plausible. Speaking of Bible bloopers, you may be interested to know that there is a Vedic text known as the Bhavishya Puran which has a story very similar to that of the Adam and Eve account. A significant difference in the Puranic version is that the two characters were explained as being a renewal of humanity on earth, not the very first humans ever. There are other similarities that may be worth looking into. For example, Abraham and his wife Sara versus Brahma and his wife Saraswati.
I don't care for an "Occam's Razor", honestly. The bottom line is that these so-called experts are giving their imperfect speculation on history. They barely know 3,000 years and they want to try and tell us what happened 10,000 years ago, or even millions of years ago. Also understand that there is evidence, and then there is the interpretation of evidence. Don't think anyone is free from subtle biases.
That "indication" is one interpretation.
We like to think we are special and that we have marked a new place in history. And conveniently for us, "details get obscured over time".
Also, the notion that Dravidians are entirely separate from Vedic culture is incorrect.
Then I guess it is just an incredible coincidence that ancient Vedic texts explain that King Rama (pronounced often as Ram - perhaps 'Rham') had a son named Kush who ruled over part of the African continent. Obviously, the Ham spoken of in the Bible fits within a time span of a mere 6,000 years. So the time factor is still an issue. Perhaps they both just used similar names, or there is always the chance that people pieced some of the Bible together by taking parts of historical accounts and fashioning them to fit into a young earth scenario. I think we both agree that the earth is much older than Christianity would have us believe. So you tell me what is more plausible. Speaking of Bible bloopers, you may be interested to know that there is a Vedic text known as the Bhavishya Puran which has a story very similar to that of the Adam and Eve account. A significant difference in the Puranic version is that the two characters were explained as being a renewal of humanity on earth, not the very first humans ever. There are other similarities that may be worth looking into. For example, Abraham and his wife Sara versus Brahma and his wife Saraswati.
I don't care for an "Occam's Razor", honestly. The bottom line is that these so-called experts are giving their imperfect speculation on history. They barely know 3,000 years and they want to try and tell us what happened 10,000 years ago, or even millions of years ago. Also understand that there is evidence, and then there is the interpretation of evidence. Don't think anyone is free from subtle biases.
That "indication" is one interpretation.
We like to think we are special and that we have marked a new place in history. And conveniently for us, "details get obscured over time".
Still doesn't pass the test of Occam's razor, you'd be forced to assume that Vedic kings lived in India before the Indus... No evidence what so ever of this besides some obscure legend.. This is the date in which the Vedas first make their presence known, what else is there to go by?
No, actually Dravidians are an Australoid people, Kin to Australian Aboriginals, the Vedas were Indo-Aryans, the two separate language phylums speak for themselves.. Now they may be unified into one culture and one people now, but not then. This is already confirmed and observable, there's still a distinct culture in Southern India..
It may or may not be a coincidence, but one thing I do know is that the Bible was very specific on the lineages of these sons, and none of them had a connection to India. Nor does the Bible mention any conquest of India on Kush, this is a contradiction. Also Ham does not equate with Rama, that is a linguistically unsound comparison. Ham is Khm in Hebrew, 'Ham" is the English translation of the word, Khm in Hebrew and Km (Kem) in ancient Egyptian are equivalent, they both mean Black and/or Burnt.. Vedic has no connection or phonetic similarities with Afro-Asiatic, any similarities are indeed coincidence. These language phylums developed independently of each other, one in East Africa, the other in Northern Europe/the Caucasus.. Or does Rama mean Black/Burnt also? As far as the time frame, again, Egypt and the cultural legacy of Kush is much older than Vedic and even 'Dravidian culture'. Similarities occur through out and isn't a monopoly of Vedic India, there's flood stories all over the world, a resurrection and savior story in Egypt(Osiris), along with monotheism (Akhenaten), and countless other parallels between distant cultures.
I agree, my only contention is that there is no evidence for what the Vedic people claim and no valid reason for taking it literally. Why assume? Why haven't the Kings of Kush or Pharaohs of Egypt reported any conquests or incursions into Africa from India? India was well known to both people.. Egyptian legend traces their culture to the Land Of Punt, south of them on the right side of the red sea, near Somali land. Queen Hatsepshut made a pilgrimage there in her reign to trade and pay tribute. The Nubians/Kushites, on the other hand stated that the Egyptians came from one of their colonies. As I've stated, different legends contradict each other and are not reliable unless other pieces of evidence validate the claim..
A logical one at that, that doesn't cling to far out and improbable ideas.
^My point exactly, so what do we know besides what can be proven indefinitely? One thing I do know is that the ancients were extremely intelligent, more so than we are now..
No, actually Dravidians are an Australoid people, Kin to Australian Aboriginals, the Vedas were Indo-Aryans, the two separate language phylums speak for themselves.. Now they may be unified into one culture and one people now, but not then. This is already confirmed and observable, there's still a distinct culture in Southern India..
It may or may not be a coincidence, but one thing I do know is that the Bible was very specific on the lineages of these sons, and none of them had a connection to India. Nor does the Bible mention any conquest of India on Kush, this is a contradiction. Also Ham does not equate with Rama, that is a linguistically unsound comparison. Ham is Khm in Hebrew, 'Ham" is the English translation of the word, Khm in Hebrew and Km (Kem) in ancient Egyptian are equivalent, they both mean Black and/or Burnt.. Vedic has no connection or phonetic similarities with Afro-Asiatic, any similarities are indeed coincidence. These language phylums developed independently of each other, one in East Africa, the other in Northern Europe/the Caucasus.. Or does Rama mean Black/Burnt also? As far as the time frame, again, Egypt and the cultural legacy of Kush is much older than Vedic and even 'Dravidian culture'. Similarities occur through out and isn't a monopoly of Vedic India, there's flood stories all over the world, a resurrection and savior story in Egypt(Osiris), along with monotheism (Akhenaten), and countless other parallels between distant cultures.
I agree, my only contention is that there is no evidence for what the Vedic people claim and no valid reason for taking it literally. Why assume? Why haven't the Kings of Kush or Pharaohs of Egypt reported any conquests or incursions into Africa from India? India was well known to both people.. Egyptian legend traces their culture to the Land Of Punt, south of them on the right side of the red sea, near Somali land. Queen Hatsepshut made a pilgrimage there in her reign to trade and pay tribute. The Nubians/Kushites, on the other hand stated that the Egyptians came from one of their colonies. As I've stated, different legends contradict each other and are not reliable unless other pieces of evidence validate the claim..
A logical one at that, that doesn't cling to far out and improbable ideas.
^My point exactly, so what do we know besides what can be proven indefinitely? One thing I do know is that the ancients were extremely intelligent, more so than we are now..
Concerning the date in which the physical books of the Vedas made their presence known as indicating the beginning of Vedic civilization is a great example of imperfect speculation. Before the Vedas were divided into four - Rig, Sam, Yajur and Atharva - and written down by Srila Vyasadev, they were transmitted from person to person, orally.
Concerning languages, I have read things to the contrary of what you are stating. As far as Aryans go, they are not defined as light skinned people who invaded India, as the imperfect scholars have speculated. An "Aryan" is simply someone who follows Vedic culture. The term does not, in itself, specify a certain region of people.
There is definitely way too much here for anyone to get through it all and point out all the flaws in all the various, interlinking theories. I will simply say that much speculation incurs. The greater amount of time we are dealing with, the more speculation is required to understand from a purely empirical viewpoint. We dig in a few places, find some stuff, then propose our theories. We may even get them to fit together (a broken clock is right twice a day). One field of knowledge effects (affects) another. If we see a connection between two ancient cultures, but another part of our theory states that they had no connection, then we do whatever we can to rule out the idea that they are connected. Knowledge filter. It isn't some great conspiracy. It's just the way humans tend to think toward predominant conceptual models of reality that gives us this network of biases.
If the legacy of Kush predates Vedic and Dravidian culture, then that means it also predates the Biblical account (i.e. according to the figures you accept, Vedic culture is up to nearly 5,000 years old and that Dravidians were around for a while before that). Ergo, not Biblical "Ham" and "Cush", but more likely the Vedic "Rama" and "Kush".
Because there wasn't one. It does not explain that Kush, son of Rama, ruled Egypt by force. According to these Vedic histories, the earth was united in one culture at the time. Remember, this was some million years ago. It is best to get rid of one's sectarian way of thinking before trying to understand all this. You seem to still be thinking in an "Egypt" versus "India" way. That is the underlying problem.
Also you have to put different time frames in their place. One culture may trace their heritage back so many thousands of years, and that may suffice in it's own scope, but then you have others that deal with millions of years. Also, the worldly situation has since been divided and tossed into an age of darkness. That much is explained in Vedic histories. We are currently in the Kali Yuga, which is the most degraded age. At the end of the previous age it is written that there was great devastation as a result of the Mahabharat war. Everyone became disconnected from each other and had only bits and pieces of their original culture, which, over time, has evolved (or devolved) into the various cultures we have today. The "linear time" and current "evolutionary" model theory spawns the "less intelligent nomadic tribe" theory, which then in turn wants us to believe that we are at a unique place in history. Welcome to Maya. In Sanskrit, 'Maya' refers to the illusory nature of this material world. It is a network of illusions. One "fact" built upon another "fact", interrelated with another "fact", and another and another.
I think what is currently thought of as "probable" needs to be analyzed. And then, the "probable" premise upon which the previous example of a "probable" was analyzed, needs to itself be analyzed. Etc, etc..... and etc. Unfortunately, people tend to take only really small steps at a time.
We may not irrefutably know something based on imperfect empirical study, but when we have similarities in supposed "myths" as well as some amount of scientific evidence that correlates with some of the accounts, it is worth looking into, IMHO. You mention contradictions in myths, and I don't say that there aren't. But also I do not therefore negate it all. The reason I lean more toward the Vedic account of history is because I have seen no other set of literatures that contains so many similar stories found in so many various other cultures. Some of the details and dates are different, but there are too many similarities to ignore. Whether or not the Vedic version of history is perfect, there is enough here in the conglomerate of cultural writings for everyone to doubt the current theories. It just happens that, in my experience, the Vedas give the most expansive view.
Concerning languages, I have read things to the contrary of what you are stating. As far as Aryans go, they are not defined as light skinned people who invaded India, as the imperfect scholars have speculated. An "Aryan" is simply someone who follows Vedic culture. The term does not, in itself, specify a certain region of people.
There is definitely way too much here for anyone to get through it all and point out all the flaws in all the various, interlinking theories. I will simply say that much speculation incurs. The greater amount of time we are dealing with, the more speculation is required to understand from a purely empirical viewpoint. We dig in a few places, find some stuff, then propose our theories. We may even get them to fit together (a broken clock is right twice a day). One field of knowledge effects (affects) another. If we see a connection between two ancient cultures, but another part of our theory states that they had no connection, then we do whatever we can to rule out the idea that they are connected. Knowledge filter. It isn't some great conspiracy. It's just the way humans tend to think toward predominant conceptual models of reality that gives us this network of biases.
If the legacy of Kush predates Vedic and Dravidian culture, then that means it also predates the Biblical account (i.e. according to the figures you accept, Vedic culture is up to nearly 5,000 years old and that Dravidians were around for a while before that). Ergo, not Biblical "Ham" and "Cush", but more likely the Vedic "Rama" and "Kush".
Because there wasn't one. It does not explain that Kush, son of Rama, ruled Egypt by force. According to these Vedic histories, the earth was united in one culture at the time. Remember, this was some million years ago. It is best to get rid of one's sectarian way of thinking before trying to understand all this. You seem to still be thinking in an "Egypt" versus "India" way. That is the underlying problem.
Also you have to put different time frames in their place. One culture may trace their heritage back so many thousands of years, and that may suffice in it's own scope, but then you have others that deal with millions of years. Also, the worldly situation has since been divided and tossed into an age of darkness. That much is explained in Vedic histories. We are currently in the Kali Yuga, which is the most degraded age. At the end of the previous age it is written that there was great devastation as a result of the Mahabharat war. Everyone became disconnected from each other and had only bits and pieces of their original culture, which, over time, has evolved (or devolved) into the various cultures we have today. The "linear time" and current "evolutionary" model theory spawns the "less intelligent nomadic tribe" theory, which then in turn wants us to believe that we are at a unique place in history. Welcome to Maya. In Sanskrit, 'Maya' refers to the illusory nature of this material world. It is a network of illusions. One "fact" built upon another "fact", interrelated with another "fact", and another and another.
I think what is currently thought of as "probable" needs to be analyzed. And then, the "probable" premise upon which the previous example of a "probable" was analyzed, needs to itself be analyzed. Etc, etc..... and etc. Unfortunately, people tend to take only really small steps at a time.
We may not irrefutably know something based on imperfect empirical study, but when we have similarities in supposed "myths" as well as some amount of scientific evidence that correlates with some of the accounts, it is worth looking into, IMHO. You mention contradictions in myths, and I don't say that there aren't. But also I do not therefore negate it all. The reason I lean more toward the Vedic account of history is because I have seen no other set of literatures that contains so many similar stories found in so many various other cultures. Some of the details and dates are different, but there are too many similarities to ignore. Whether or not the Vedic version of history is perfect, there is enough here in the conglomerate of cultural writings for everyone to doubt the current theories. It just happens that, in my experience, the Vedas give the most expansive view.
damn i aint gonna jump in yall debate i dont even wanna read all that right now i jus wanna state my opinion...... and that is although there is lacc of enough solid evidence to proove it right now i still beleive there was a time wayyyy bacc when the earth was a united race of people whether it was the Atlanteans or someone else.......and they had knowledge and technology that wasnt quite what we got today but some things they knew are things we way behind on.....the pyramids are proof of that.......did you know that the Great Pyramid is also musically tuned???? i have to look it up online cuz i read most of it in books but i read about tests they did and that shit is a giant instrument.....there are thousands of "religious" sites around the world and they are all connected......the pyramids of egypt, asia and central/south america.....stonehedge.....etc......the Atlantis Blueprint goes deep into this.......these spots were basically landmarks at one time for the atlanteans....a people who traveled aound the globe frequently and had mapped it all out at a time way before we wanna comprehend.....i dont think the human race is younger than we think...... i think its OLDER than we want to beleive.....that is why we also beleive there is no solid proof of this cuz we aint even ready to open our minds up and find the evidence that is there......its too outside the box and the few geniuses that have figured it out are kept quiet and made to look like theyre crazy......cuz this type of thinkin will offset many religious beliefs but at the same time i think it will also proove many religions are based on somethin tangible and not jus "mythology".....
bottom line there has to be explanations for thousands of things that we cant explain.......the human brain iisnt even fully used to its potential and we barely learning about that so if we dont even know the full use of our own brain then how will we ever figure out whats goin on in the whole universe????
bottom line there has to be explanations for thousands of things that we cant explain.......the human brain iisnt even fully used to its potential and we barely learning about that so if we dont even know the full use of our own brain then how will we ever figure out whats goin on in the whole universe????
I understand that, but the fact of the matter is, mainstream consensus holds that these people were invaders and a part of the "Indo-European Expansion", and we're relying on some 4,000 year old legend to prove scholars wrong. I'm not sure if that's logical, common sense and general knowledge will tell you that the Indo-European language phylum is native to the out skirts of Europe.
As I've emphasized, the culture bearers of the Indo-European language phylum come from the outskirts of Europe, presumably most people native to that area would in fact be light skinned.. Though I admit that it isn't necessarily true that all who inherit the culture by default also inherit the 'racial characteristics' of the forbears, but it's clear that these people were distinct from the previous Dravidian societies.
^Point and case, there's two extremes in which I don't abide by either. There's the extremely selective and liberal approach, and there's the closed-minded, skeptical, conservative approach. I go with what makes the most sense given all of the available information, but don't rule out possibility. Probability and possibility are two different things though. Did a Vedic Indian prince invade the Sudan and name it "Kush", after him? Possible? But on another note, probably not..
I don't see the point here.. Adam and Eve also predate the Biblical account of them, it didn't stop them from giving them a name. What you wrote doesn't make sense because like I've emphasized, we get our name for that region of the Sudan from the Bible. Vedic culture was not thought of when we decided to refer to these people as "Kush".. Besides, does the Vedic account indicate what part of the African continent? Africa is pretty big...
^Because it's simply hard to believe this one legend over the copious amount of research done in the Nile Valley among archaeologists and cultural anthropologists. I can't strip naked and relieve myself of all faith in science in the name of one Indian legend, especially when other legends contradict it. It just seems ridiculous, and I have a very open mind, trust me. I believe in Aliens, Ghosts, and all type of shit. But If anything India's account is bias, why is India at the center of this world wide culture? Why are they doing the invading (peaceful or not)?.. I can answer that question but you should know..
It seems as if you're stretching your argument in order to argue the validity of Vedic legend over Egyptian legend. You'd have to be familiar with the actual Egyptian legend though to make that argument. Punt or "pwonit" in Mdw Ntr(ancient egyptian) literally translated to "Land Of The First existence". They also referred to it as "Ta Netjer", or God's land. You're now belittling Egyptian knowledge while uplifting Indian tradition for the sake of argument. The Nubians claimed that they were the most ancient people on earth, again this is in direct contradiction to the chauvinism of the Indian legend. Also, personally I don't believe that humans are millions of years old(or even 1 million). I think evolution and theology would both agree to that, which is rare. Not too many people would take that notion truly serious..
There's nothing to analyze, the analysis is in the probability, which is actually a mathematical science. What's the probability of you rolling a 7, 7 times in a row on the dice board? The odds are extremely against you, therefore improbable, but is it possible? Yes.. Though I wouldn't put the house on it.
Let's get to the point.. Are you arguing that we should abandon and reevaluate all of our scientific techniques, and in the mean while replace it with 4,000 year old Vedic legends? Nothing is perfect, that's a non-sequitur. Also, if you except the fact that myths contradict each other then what basis do you have in believing one over the other? Your argument for Vedic history is speculative, selective, and probably biased (culturally that is). Try reading about the Dogon tribe in Mali, they'd kick Vedic ass any day.
http://squirreltao.dreamfishery.com/2007/01/07/dogon/
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/et029.html
As I've emphasized, the culture bearers of the Indo-European language phylum come from the outskirts of Europe, presumably most people native to that area would in fact be light skinned.. Though I admit that it isn't necessarily true that all who inherit the culture by default also inherit the 'racial characteristics' of the forbears, but it's clear that these people were distinct from the previous Dravidian societies.
^Point and case, there's two extremes in which I don't abide by either. There's the extremely selective and liberal approach, and there's the closed-minded, skeptical, conservative approach. I go with what makes the most sense given all of the available information, but don't rule out possibility. Probability and possibility are two different things though. Did a Vedic Indian prince invade the Sudan and name it "Kush", after him? Possible? But on another note, probably not..
I don't see the point here.. Adam and Eve also predate the Biblical account of them, it didn't stop them from giving them a name. What you wrote doesn't make sense because like I've emphasized, we get our name for that region of the Sudan from the Bible. Vedic culture was not thought of when we decided to refer to these people as "Kush".. Besides, does the Vedic account indicate what part of the African continent? Africa is pretty big...
^Because it's simply hard to believe this one legend over the copious amount of research done in the Nile Valley among archaeologists and cultural anthropologists. I can't strip naked and relieve myself of all faith in science in the name of one Indian legend, especially when other legends contradict it. It just seems ridiculous, and I have a very open mind, trust me. I believe in Aliens, Ghosts, and all type of shit. But If anything India's account is bias, why is India at the center of this world wide culture? Why are they doing the invading (peaceful or not)?.. I can answer that question but you should know..
It seems as if you're stretching your argument in order to argue the validity of Vedic legend over Egyptian legend. You'd have to be familiar with the actual Egyptian legend though to make that argument. Punt or "pwonit" in Mdw Ntr(ancient egyptian) literally translated to "Land Of The First existence". They also referred to it as "Ta Netjer", or God's land. You're now belittling Egyptian knowledge while uplifting Indian tradition for the sake of argument. The Nubians claimed that they were the most ancient people on earth, again this is in direct contradiction to the chauvinism of the Indian legend. Also, personally I don't believe that humans are millions of years old(or even 1 million). I think evolution and theology would both agree to that, which is rare. Not too many people would take that notion truly serious..
There's nothing to analyze, the analysis is in the probability, which is actually a mathematical science. What's the probability of you rolling a 7, 7 times in a row on the dice board? The odds are extremely against you, therefore improbable, but is it possible? Yes.. Though I wouldn't put the house on it.
Let's get to the point.. Are you arguing that we should abandon and reevaluate all of our scientific techniques, and in the mean while replace it with 4,000 year old Vedic legends? Nothing is perfect, that's a non-sequitur. Also, if you except the fact that myths contradict each other then what basis do you have in believing one over the other? Your argument for Vedic history is speculative, selective, and probably biased (culturally that is). Try reading about the Dogon tribe in Mali, they'd kick Vedic ass any day.
http://squirreltao.dreamfishery.com/2007/01/07/dogon/
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/et029.html
this is what i tell people to think about....
suppose for some reason the earth goes through a drastic change in a small period of time......nuclear war, extreme natural disaster like a meteor, somethin that really changes the way people live and depend on technology......there will be survivors in various places and they will continue to evolve the human race slowly over thousands of years but wont be able to continue all the technologies .....eventually this time we live in will be forgotten and a lot of our technology and scientific facts may be reduced to "myths" only cuz the proof has been lost.....
unless the rumors are true and there is already steps being taken to ensure that wont happen, ie: a space sanctuary or somethin deep in the earth that can protect a select group of humans to survive....
but i beleive this is basically what happened wit the "atlanteans" and only some of thier culture and technologies were continued by aztecs,mayans, egyptians, persians, greeks, romans etc.........thier past existance became "god-like" and thier tech. knowledge became "magic" to some of these cultures and eventually turned into "myths" by modern science standards......and it can happen again but i think wit the technology and brain power we have now we most likely wont let it happen if we can control it.......
suppose for some reason the earth goes through a drastic change in a small period of time......nuclear war, extreme natural disaster like a meteor, somethin that really changes the way people live and depend on technology......there will be survivors in various places and they will continue to evolve the human race slowly over thousands of years but wont be able to continue all the technologies .....eventually this time we live in will be forgotten and a lot of our technology and scientific facts may be reduced to "myths" only cuz the proof has been lost.....
unless the rumors are true and there is already steps being taken to ensure that wont happen, ie: a space sanctuary or somethin deep in the earth that can protect a select group of humans to survive....
but i beleive this is basically what happened wit the "atlanteans" and only some of thier culture and technologies were continued by aztecs,mayans, egyptians, persians, greeks, romans etc.........thier past existance became "god-like" and thier tech. knowledge became "magic" to some of these cultures and eventually turned into "myths" by modern science standards......and it can happen again but i think wit the technology and brain power we have now we most likely wont let it happen if we can control it.......
See, this type of thinking touches on a sensitive issue. It's almost as if we don't have faith in our ancestors, so we look for answers outside the box to how they did things. "Oh, no way that these indigenous cultures could of figured out how to do this themselves thousands of years ago, it must be due to some supreme race of Atlanteans who existed in a much more distant past!".. This undermines the accomplishments of the humble architects of the 4th Dynasty of Egypt under the direction of Pharaoh Khufu and that of the great builders in the Americas at Mach Picchu.. Are we really willing to take that from them? I know I'd be pissed if I didn't get credit for that shit..