"Architect claims to solve pyramid secret"
- Thread starter Toro
- Start date
like i said people need to think outside of the box to even begin to understand....some of you dont have brains that can think like this.....some can only think what they are trained to think......
you can call it "highly active imagination" but "ihigly active magination" built the pyramids and science cant figure out how......
you can call it "highly active imagination" but "ihigly active magination" built the pyramids and science cant figure out how......
take your sig for example.....the ethiopeans you speak of were a great race of people.....if you took a starving child from ethipia with no schooling or any kind of knowledge of his peoples history and tried to explain to him how great his descendants the Kushites were he would probably have a hard time understanding or even wanting to beleive.....all he knows is his people aint that great now......
This is condescending and a well known logical fallacy. We can't draw conclusions simply by having an open mind.
Exactly, and it wouldn't be right to teach these kids that their ancestor's accomplishments were due to some imaginary race of people. They belong to a legacy that cannot be tarnished by myth making..
They were different entities separated by language. culture, ethnicity, and distance. It isn't right to fit them into the same context as their cultural legacy does not rely on India, nor vice versa..
Like I said, the Bible recorded things that supposedly happened in the distant past as did Vedic culture, what basis do you have to believe the Vedas' word over the Bible's, Christian or not?
Exactly, and it wouldn't be right to teach these kids that their ancestor's accomplishments were due to some imaginary race of people. They belong to a legacy that cannot be tarnished by myth making..
They were different entities separated by language. culture, ethnicity, and distance. It isn't right to fit them into the same context as their cultural legacy does not rely on India, nor vice versa..
Like I said, the Bible recorded things that supposedly happened in the distant past as did Vedic culture, what basis do you have to believe the Vedas' word over the Bible's, Christian or not?
What!? No. Are you seriously trying to tell me that there are no significant links between ancient Egypt and India?? You're going to tell me that Egypt did not perform different types of yoga like meditation, sitting postures, chanting, etc? I have read things from people who promote a very Afrocentric view, who also promote that these practices were done in Africa. They just say that India took it from them. I am saying that the similarities exist because a single, though very broad culture once pervaded the world. It just so happens that the subcontinent of India has maintained more informations than others.
Then tell me at what point "Egypt" became known as Kush. Because you say that it happened before the Biblical account. Well, if it happened before the Biblical account, and the Biblical account is a mere 6,000 years, then obviously it couldn't be in reference to the Bible since, according to most Christians, there was no humanity prior to 6,000 years ago!
Then tell me at what point "Egypt" became known as Kush. Because you say that it happened before the Biblical account. Well, if it happened before the Biblical account, and the Biblical account is a mere 6,000 years, then obviously it couldn't be in reference to the Bible since, according to most Christians, there was no humanity prior to 6,000 years ago!
What are you talking about?! Why is that surprising? They had nothing in common, no need to force similarities. This has nothing to do with Afrocentrism first of all, but I can tell you there were a great many more similarities between Egyptian culture and Nubia then compared to India, they were in fact the same culture at first and Ta-Seti (in the lower Sudan) was the first Nome of upper Egypt. I've read many accounts and written records on Egypt, read thorough studies on predynastic culture in the Nile valley, I have reviewed studies on anthropological remains, cranial studies, the development of written language, the Saharan connection, and there is no inference to India, none. Egypt fits with in a localized Nile valley setting and had closest ties to those closest to them, mainly the Nubians and Lybians. It is foolish to take Egypt out of Africa and place it somewhere next to India, while disregarding the entire predynastic history of Egypt its self. Yoga was not an ancient Egyptian practice and meditation isn't a monopoly of India, many cultures do it. I have no idea how you associate "sitting postures, chanting" with the ancient Egyptians, what pseudo-history are you referring to? That is absurd, what tomb, what pharaoh followed these buddhist and Hindu rituals? I'm not sure if you know anything about Ancient Egypt at all, what have you read on Egypt? I'd like to see where you get your info.. Besides, how in the world can they receive cultural traits from India when Egyptian culture is older?! You're not making sense. You have no proof for any of your claims, not even evidence to suggest. The Egyptians migrated from the south, the first dynasty King conquered lower Egypt from the south, not the North. Contact with India was limited to trade and there are no known significant similarities (or even minor) to suggest some hypothetical "broad culture" of different ethnicities and languages united into one. That is ridiculous... There is no debating with me when it comes to Egypt, especially about some imaginary cultural ties with some distant group in Asia..
The Bible says Kush was a son of Ham who was a son of Noah.. If the Vedic text doesn't say that then it's unreliable in relation to the Kush we know of.. And Noah was here some 4,000 years ago, there's no contradiction except with in that obscure Vedic legend that you want to apply to the Nile Valley, and that revisionist history won't work with anybody who study's Nile valley history..
The Bible says Kush was a son of Ham who was a son of Noah.. If the Vedic text doesn't say that then it's unreliable in relation to the Kush we know of.. And Noah was here some 4,000 years ago, there's no contradiction except with in that obscure Vedic legend that you want to apply to the Nile Valley, and that revisionist history won't work with anybody who study's Nile valley history..
Friday, 21 July 2006, 13:34 GMT 14:34 UK
Ancient humans 'followed rains'
By Helen Briggs
Science reporter, BBC News
Prehistoric humans roamed the world's largest desert for some 5,000 years, archaeologists have revealed.
The Eastern Sahara of Egypt, Sudan, Libya and Chad was home to nomadic people who followed rains that turned the desert into grassland.
When the landscape dried up about 7,000 years ago, there was a mass exodus to the Nile and other parts of Africa.
The close link between human settlement and climate has lessons for today, researchers report in Science.
"Even modern day conflicts such as Dafur are caused by environmental degradation as it has been in the past," Dr Stefan Kropelin of the University of Cologne, Germany, told the BBC News website.
"The basic struggle for food, water and pasture is still a big problem in the Sahara zone. This process started thousands of years ago and has a long tradition."
Jigsaw puzzle
The Eastern Sahara, which covers more than 2 million sq km, an area the size of Western Europe, is now almost uninhabited by people or animals, providing a unique window into the past.
Dr Kropelin and colleague Dr Rudolph Kuper pieced together the 10,000-year jigsaw of human migration and settlement; studying more than 100 archaeological sites over the course of 30 years.
In the largest study of its kind, they built up a detailed picture of human evolution in the world's largest desert. They found that far from the inhospitable climate of today, the area was once semi-humid.
Between about 14,000 and 13,000 years ago, the area was very dry. But a drastic switch in environmental conditions some 10,500 years ago brought rain and monsoon-like conditions.
Nomadic human settlers moved in from the south, taking up residence beside rivers and lakes. They were hunter-gatherers at first, living off plants and wild game.
Eventually they became more settled, domesticating cattle for the first time, and making intricate pottery.
Neolithic farmers
Humid conditions prevailed until about 6,000 years ago, when the Sahara abruptly dried out. There was then a gradual exodus of people to the Nile Valley and other parts of the African continent.
"The domestication of cattle was invented in the Sahara in the humid phase and was then slowly pushed over the rest of Africa"
Dr Stefan Kropelin of the University of Cologne
"The Nile Valley was almost devoid of settlement until about exactly the time that the Egyptian Sahara was so dry people could not live there anymore," Dr Kropelin told the BBC News website.
"People preferred to live on savannah land. Only when this wasn't possible they migrated towards southern Sudan and the Nile.
"They brought all their know-how to the rest of the continent - the domestication of cattle was invented in the Sahara in the humid phase and was then slowly pushed over the rest of Africa.
"This Neolithic way of life, which still is a way of life in a sense; preservation of food for the dry season and many other such cultural elements, was introduced to central and southern Africa from the Sahara."
'Motor of evolution'
Dr Kuper said the distribution of people and languages, which is so politically important today, has its roots in the desiccation of the Sahara.
The switch in environmental conditions acted as a "motor of Africa's evolution," he said.
"It happened during these 5,000 years of the savannah that people changed from hunter-gathers to cattle keepers," he said.
"This important step in human history has been made for the first time in the African Sahara."
Ancient humans 'followed rains'
By Helen Briggs
Science reporter, BBC News
Prehistoric humans roamed the world's largest desert for some 5,000 years, archaeologists have revealed.
The Eastern Sahara of Egypt, Sudan, Libya and Chad was home to nomadic people who followed rains that turned the desert into grassland.
When the landscape dried up about 7,000 years ago, there was a mass exodus to the Nile and other parts of Africa.
The close link between human settlement and climate has lessons for today, researchers report in Science.
"Even modern day conflicts such as Dafur are caused by environmental degradation as it has been in the past," Dr Stefan Kropelin of the University of Cologne, Germany, told the BBC News website.
"The basic struggle for food, water and pasture is still a big problem in the Sahara zone. This process started thousands of years ago and has a long tradition."
Jigsaw puzzle
The Eastern Sahara, which covers more than 2 million sq km, an area the size of Western Europe, is now almost uninhabited by people or animals, providing a unique window into the past.
Dr Kropelin and colleague Dr Rudolph Kuper pieced together the 10,000-year jigsaw of human migration and settlement; studying more than 100 archaeological sites over the course of 30 years.
In the largest study of its kind, they built up a detailed picture of human evolution in the world's largest desert. They found that far from the inhospitable climate of today, the area was once semi-humid.
Between about 14,000 and 13,000 years ago, the area was very dry. But a drastic switch in environmental conditions some 10,500 years ago brought rain and monsoon-like conditions.
Nomadic human settlers moved in from the south, taking up residence beside rivers and lakes. They were hunter-gatherers at first, living off plants and wild game.
Eventually they became more settled, domesticating cattle for the first time, and making intricate pottery.
Neolithic farmers
Humid conditions prevailed until about 6,000 years ago, when the Sahara abruptly dried out. There was then a gradual exodus of people to the Nile Valley and other parts of the African continent.
"The domestication of cattle was invented in the Sahara in the humid phase and was then slowly pushed over the rest of Africa"
Dr Stefan Kropelin of the University of Cologne
"The Nile Valley was almost devoid of settlement until about exactly the time that the Egyptian Sahara was so dry people could not live there anymore," Dr Kropelin told the BBC News website.
"People preferred to live on savannah land. Only when this wasn't possible they migrated towards southern Sudan and the Nile.
"They brought all their know-how to the rest of the continent - the domestication of cattle was invented in the Sahara in the humid phase and was then slowly pushed over the rest of Africa.
"This Neolithic way of life, which still is a way of life in a sense; preservation of food for the dry season and many other such cultural elements, was introduced to central and southern Africa from the Sahara."
'Motor of evolution'
Dr Kuper said the distribution of people and languages, which is so politically important today, has its roots in the desiccation of the Sahara.
The switch in environmental conditions acted as a "motor of Africa's evolution," he said.
"It happened during these 5,000 years of the savannah that people changed from hunter-gathers to cattle keepers," he said.
"This important step in human history has been made for the first time in the African Sahara."
This is a non-sequitur and a typical cop-out from someone who has no argument to back up his crack pot theories, which makes the debate extremely uneven when people simply don't know what they're talking about. I guess education and reading is worthless, I should just have an "open mind" and forget everything that I've learned and analyzed over the past several years just because you can't argue with me. Please, if that's the case don't speak on shit you're not sure about mystery man. Maybe aliens built the pyramids and the Sphinx is an image of Krishna. Yea right, you'll never be able to undermine my research and knowledge of history with your troll type rhetoric, show me some research, some actual work that you did on the subject and come back. Anything else is just lazy as shit, highly speculative, and borderline loony.. Read a book and leave Narnia for a second, come back to reality... I guess George Washington didn't exist because I wasn't there, the white house was built by Atlanteans.
Fucking cook... Hahaha..
Fucking cook... Hahaha..Here's an entire page on Ancient Egyptian history, including in depth and empirical archaeological, anthropological, linguistic, and cultural studies. Believe me, if India or Atlantis were relevant, they'd be mentioned here..
Shomarka O.Y. Keita, M.D. (Howard), PH.D. ( Oxford University)
Senior Research Associate The National Human Genome Center Howard University and Research Associate Natural History Museum and Human Origins Program Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC
http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/keita.html
Origin of the Nilotic peoples
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Nilotic_peoples
Everything else you'd need to know about Egypt..
http://www.egyptsearch.com/
^Now take all of this information in, then maybe I'll continue with this conversation, but other than that I can't argue with you guys about some stupid shit like long lost cultures when the research ultimately contradicts that hysterically bogus notion.. Just stop it and leave history alone, you're only destroying people's legacy, and being open minded doesn't make you smart, but being too open minded makes you look eccentric if not simply crazy as hell...
Shomarka O.Y. Keita, M.D. (Howard), PH.D. ( Oxford University)
Senior Research Associate The National Human Genome Center Howard University and Research Associate Natural History Museum and Human Origins Program Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC
http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/keita.html
Origin of the Nilotic peoples
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Nilotic_peoples
Everything else you'd need to know about Egypt..
http://www.egyptsearch.com/
^Now take all of this information in, then maybe I'll continue with this conversation, but other than that I can't argue with you guys about some stupid shit like long lost cultures when the research ultimately contradicts that hysterically bogus notion.. Just stop it and leave history alone, you're only destroying people's legacy, and being open minded doesn't make you smart, but being too open minded makes you look eccentric if not simply crazy as hell...
Have you ever heard of Sema Tawi?
Also check out: Vedic connections in Africa and Egypt
*smacks forehead*
Okay, so Noah was around 4,000 years ago, didn't have Ham until he was 500, then how old was Ham when he had Cush?
Whatever it was, what you are telling me is that Egypt was known as Kush based on the Bible, which therefore means the name is closer to 3,000 to 3,500 years ago.
You also say that the name Kush for Egypt was around before Vedic culture was thought of. Obviously this is not true. The modern figures you cited dated back as far as 4,500 years for Vedic culture.
So either the name of Kush is older than the Biblical account, or it did not apply to Egypt before the existence of Vedic culture, as per the imperfect scholars.
Also check out: Vedic connections in Africa and Egypt
*smacks forehead*
Okay, so Noah was around 4,000 years ago, didn't have Ham until he was 500, then how old was Ham when he had Cush?
Whatever it was, what you are telling me is that Egypt was known as Kush based on the Bible, which therefore means the name is closer to 3,000 to 3,500 years ago.
You also say that the name Kush for Egypt was around before Vedic culture was thought of. Obviously this is not true. The modern figures you cited dated back as far as 4,500 years for Vedic culture.
So either the name of Kush is older than the Biblical account, or it did not apply to Egypt before the existence of Vedic culture, as per the imperfect scholars.
First of all, do you believe humanity is only 6,000 years old?
Secondly, If you would study the Vedas and consider the great discipline practiced to maintain and pass down knowledge, then you would understand why the answer to your question is obvious. The most religiously meticulous people live in India. They follow strict penances and learn to control the body in ways that are unheard of anywhere else. For example, by yoga practice some have been able to control the flow of blood in the body. I saw this some years back on National Geographic. They would basically stop the blood flow in their arm by meditation and then stick a large needle through their arm and no blood would come out. This is just as example of the kind of discipline they undergo. As far as passing down knowledge goes, there schooling is very strict and only the most serious students are accomodated. Spiritual knowledge is passed down from guru to disciple in an even more strict fashion than regular schooling.
And you want to compare this to the Biblical tradition? What is the significance of a Constantine or a King James? Were they pure devotees of God coming down in direct disciple succession? Were the Bible teachings passed down from a self-realized 'guru' who was in full knowledge of the exact meaning of the texts, or did these Europeans take some books, compile some of them together and then interpret a translation?
Secondly, If you would study the Vedas and consider the great discipline practiced to maintain and pass down knowledge, then you would understand why the answer to your question is obvious. The most religiously meticulous people live in India. They follow strict penances and learn to control the body in ways that are unheard of anywhere else. For example, by yoga practice some have been able to control the flow of blood in the body. I saw this some years back on National Geographic. They would basically stop the blood flow in their arm by meditation and then stick a large needle through their arm and no blood would come out. This is just as example of the kind of discipline they undergo. As far as passing down knowledge goes, there schooling is very strict and only the most serious students are accomodated. Spiritual knowledge is passed down from guru to disciple in an even more strict fashion than regular schooling.
And you want to compare this to the Biblical tradition? What is the significance of a Constantine or a King James? Were they pure devotees of God coming down in direct disciple succession? Were the Bible teachings passed down from a self-realized 'guru' who was in full knowledge of the exact meaning of the texts, or did these Europeans take some books, compile some of them together and then interpret a translation?
All that I have to say is that you must be Indian because you're pushing these myths pretty far and giving them precedence over the latest statistical and analytical research on ancient Egypt and Africa. You take it as an article of faith, and even elevate it over the Bible. I can't knock your religion, just don't be surprised if others don't take it as literally. You see all of the debates on here concerning God and evolution, this follows the same pattern.
Edit: I'm watching your video now and I will give you the benefit of the doubt that Veda culture probably was indigenous, as opposed to being a cause of the Aryan invasion.. Evidence can go either way, but I'll reserve judgment on that aspect and give the people of India the right-a-way to tell their own story just as long as it isn't at the expense of other culture's accomplishments and history.
Edit: I'm watching your video now and I will give you the benefit of the doubt that Veda culture probably was indigenous, as opposed to being a cause of the Aryan invasion.. Evidence can go either way, but I'll reserve judgment on that aspect and give the people of India the right-a-way to tell their own story just as long as it isn't at the expense of other culture's accomplishments and history.
I am not Indian, nor was I raised in what I follow.
I have read and heard numerous quotes from scholars who noted a significant connection between Egypt and India. And we can always argue who got what from who, but that isn't my point. It is much more accurate to say that Egypt maintained certain parts of the ancient human civilization and India maintained other parts. There are also significant similarities between Vedic culture and ancient civilizations in the Americas. One of those links I provided has details on that as well.
I don't say that the Bible is completely wrong, but I, at this time, have more reason to put my faith behind the Vedic Shastra. It is highly possible that there was a man named Cush who was the grandson of Noah, and who lived some 3,500 years ago. I don't find any reason to disbelieve that. At the same time, there can also have been a Kush, son of Rama, who lived much earlier. We say that the Christian and Muslim religions are "Kali Yuga religion" because their advent has taken place in this Kali age. The story of Adam and Eve as well as the lineage descending from them showing how the lifespans began to dwindle is a perfect example of the transition between the Dvapara Yuga and the Kali Yuga we are now in. Not to mention that, according to Vedic teachings, people lived about 1,000 years in the Dvapara Yuga. I don't know how familiar you are with the Bible, but consider how long Adam and Eve lived. In this case, the Biblical account and Vedic account are very much in line with each other.
I don't just believe in anything. I won't pick up some vague text remnant of some ancient tribe and believe it. I really don't think anyone does. What causes people to adhere to a specific religious tradition and teaching is that they are convinced through the seemingly meticulous and very focused nature of the author(s) and personalities described in those sacred texts. This coupled with a convincing philosophy on the nature of life and existence.
I have read and heard numerous quotes from scholars who noted a significant connection between Egypt and India. And we can always argue who got what from who, but that isn't my point. It is much more accurate to say that Egypt maintained certain parts of the ancient human civilization and India maintained other parts. There are also significant similarities between Vedic culture and ancient civilizations in the Americas. One of those links I provided has details on that as well.
I don't say that the Bible is completely wrong, but I, at this time, have more reason to put my faith behind the Vedic Shastra. It is highly possible that there was a man named Cush who was the grandson of Noah, and who lived some 3,500 years ago. I don't find any reason to disbelieve that. At the same time, there can also have been a Kush, son of Rama, who lived much earlier. We say that the Christian and Muslim religions are "Kali Yuga religion" because their advent has taken place in this Kali age. The story of Adam and Eve as well as the lineage descending from them showing how the lifespans began to dwindle is a perfect example of the transition between the Dvapara Yuga and the Kali Yuga we are now in. Not to mention that, according to Vedic teachings, people lived about 1,000 years in the Dvapara Yuga. I don't know how familiar you are with the Bible, but consider how long Adam and Eve lived. In this case, the Biblical account and Vedic account are very much in line with each other.
I don't just believe in anything. I won't pick up some vague text remnant of some ancient tribe and believe it. I really don't think anyone does. What causes people to adhere to a specific religious tradition and teaching is that they are convinced through the seemingly meticulous and very focused nature of the author(s) and personalities described in those sacred texts. This coupled with a convincing philosophy on the nature of life and existence.
I still suggest that you check the links I've posted since they most surely refute all of the claims made in the one link you posted. I can refute half of the claims myself. And I'm sorry, but I'd have to accuse you of contradicting yourself, unless you're just using google and not checking the sources you post. The video emphasizes how the Aryan invasion was a myth, yet the Eurocentric trash that you posted in the other link not only reinstates that notion, but advocates an Aryan expansion into Africa also, which is laughable..
Your source
"For an imaginative account of the relations between the ancient Vedic and Egyptian civilization, see Bhagwan Gidwani's monumental (900 pages) novel detailing Aryan movement out of India to other parts of the world and their eventual return to India in "Return of the Aryans" (New Delhi: Penguin India 1994). See particularly chapters "Kings of Egypt and the Language of the Gods" and "Egypt and the Kingdom of Ajitab."...
^Now this is nothing more than the typical racialist trash from the 19th/early 20th century which seeks to place Aryans or "white people" every where, where civilization pops up. Ha! Please, we're past that now, as is emphasized in current research, and those ghosts have been exorcised. What you've posted is but a remnant of past pseudo-scholarship that used speculation and distant inane relationships (which can be found among all cultures of the world to some degree because we're all civilized people) in order to make claims of things as extreme as world conquest. I don't like that, I'll tell you straight up, stuff like this is beyond myth making and touches on sensitive cultural issues and aspects of identity.
*DING*
Also note the part that says, "for an imaginative account".
The point is to show that is connection between Egypt and India. That's all. Someone's imaginative account of how this happened is not so much important. Also, you don't even know what the author of that book means when referring to "Aryans". You automatically jump to the conclusion that he means "white people".
Also, assuming that there was a movement of people involved, why does it have to be an invasion? If the president visits another country, is that necessarily an invasion. Let us, for a moment, say we consider USA as the capital of democracy. Does it mean when representatives of the USA travel to other countries that it is necessarily in a fashion of invasion? It can be, but doesn't have to be. Similarly, if there was travel between Egypt and India, that doesn't mean that it was an invasion.
Here is another link for you to scrutinize: Akhenaten, Surya, and the Rigveda
Also note the part that says, "for an imaginative account".
The point is to show that is connection between Egypt and India. That's all. Someone's imaginative account of how this happened is not so much important. Also, you don't even know what the author of that book means when referring to "Aryans". You automatically jump to the conclusion that he means "white people".
Also, assuming that there was a movement of people involved, why does it have to be an invasion? If the president visits another country, is that necessarily an invasion. Let us, for a moment, say we consider USA as the capital of democracy. Does it mean when representatives of the USA travel to other countries that it is necessarily in a fashion of invasion? It can be, but doesn't have to be. Similarly, if there was travel between Egypt and India, that doesn't mean that it was an invasion.
Here is another link for you to scrutinize: Akhenaten, Surya, and the Rigveda