Listen up I am a American Indian. There r a few dicoveries of these types of people. People hav been sailing for thousands of years Polynesians have been the greatest sails since ancient times. On the coast of California we hav stories of trading with visitors on boats. Two canoe type pods decked together with sails. The world was not isolated. We had knowledge of other worlds or lands. Carbon dating is not as accurate as they say
@Broodrood- YAWN....................if the best you've got is pointing out a type-o, then you're curbside debate skills are lacking in every form of rational thought. But I guess I shouldn't expecting too much, LOL.
White Euro-PEE-ons have formulated many generic languages, English being one of the most debased of them all. Germananic, Vulgar German, slavic, and the rest of those bastard languages are nothing special.
Bas·tard
Adjective /ˈbastərd/
1.Born of parents not married to each other; illegitimate
2.(of a thing) No longer in its pure or original form; debased
3.(of a handwriting script or typeface) Showing a mixture of different styles
I could be wrong, but is there not an ancient tale of giants that lived through south America before the Inca?
i remember a kid (back in my school days) arguing with a history teacher saying that America's history was bias and left out many things documented through out history, before the white man started writing.
Anyone who has read up on these tales would know that there is very little evidence, and a lot of theory, to support the idea that Anglo-Europeans had ever arrived in pre-historic America. It has been firmly established that the blond and red haired Peruvian mummies were ordinary mummified indians with dark hair that had naturally been died from the acidic environment in which their remains had lain.
@akichita87 I'd say that there's zero DNA and artefactual evidence supporting that the Peruvian mummies are European. It's mostly conjecture and wishful thinking by Eurocentrists and Racialists.
hahaha just couse they have a straight nose does not mean theyre euro, p.s indians where known to dye their hair too, sooooo fukkkk u white thiefs, this is a culture your not goin to steal like youi did egypt from the blacks
those mumies at 1:07 have their hair dyed,.. nice try you culture thiefs, i mean in your heart you know if its your ppl or not why do you try and say these mumies are white,,they have dyed hair which yes they did dye their hair, and the skull up north just becvouse they have longer skulls you think theyr white, umm hello those idians up there have too gone through evolution,
this video is just an excuse for racism! humans have probably been coming to america for thousands of years from east and west. who got here first? the witnesses are all dead and didn't document it because the idea was to get food, not win a race! get over it, the gene pool has circulated this planet many times. we're all half breeds!!!!!!
Sorry for the earlier reference, however, none of these artifacts was able to be used since, speculation; was that it was buried/planted by someone in a particular spot on the American continent. I researched this story back in it first came out.
Solutreans from Iberia/france thousands of years before that
When I hear those Marxist Brown Nazis spouting they are indigenous whites go back to Europe, that helps to explain the suppression/ cover up of the truth
I thought it was pretty good. I liked the Smithsonian backed "Ice Age Columbus" documentary better, shows that European Caucasoids boated over thousands of years before the Mongoloids from Asia came over a land bridge
Preach it my brother below, history is for educated people, not politically correct retards. Also, mainstream "history" books say that natives never built in stone, so who do you think erected the megaliths in New England, at mystery hill, etc... not to mention the stone workings at Chaco Canyon (Anasazi). This is just an inkling of what Europeans were doing here. Also, check the so called "indian" serpent mound in Ohio, it had an earlier model in Avebury England (also one in Scotland) !!
Yeah...... that fuckin' science (reality) and the real world keep getting in the way of non-whites distorted, fanciful beliefs. If it was not for our influence (Europeans) in the Americas...the natives would still be shitting and eating out of the same hole in the ground. That's the reality....it may not be politically correct, but it's the truth.
White should learn to not live in a world of lie & deception. aka. democracy/politics. Their story keeps changinn every few years. Stick around to see what the "experts" say next.LO fu___ngL.
so this only proves white man usta be Indians so what happened 2 make them loose there connection 2 the earth i think it might be cause thy gather dead trees faster then we can plant new trees (LOL) if we find out native Americans Indian's started in England can it bee taken by the people like the Americans done here, if you find a prehistoric pitch fork an sword in pre-America then they were white but if not then they are native indian cause that is a way of life not a color, return 2 native
Dec 4, 2008. Google - "Ancient city discovered deep in Amazonian rainforest linked to the legendary white-skinned Cloud People of Peru."
Paragraph #2 "Little is known about the Cloud People of Peru, an ancient, white-skinned civilisation..."
Paragraph #5 "The tribe had white skin and blonde hair...."
White people in the Americas at least many hundreds of years before Christopher Columbus? Again, more info consistent with our (and others') basic thesis...Go to the blog for more...
I believe the cloud people are called the Chachapoyas. you should check out the video on youtube called Our Forgotten History it goes into those people a little bit and also mentions atlantis.
@lemonhide lol they were called white becouse they where known as cloud ppl who wore white paint on thier face and as for the blond hair ; the indians as the egyptians had always dyed their hair lighter, lol seriously you ppl are scavengers looking for a culture you can come up on
An excellent video! When people descry me as being a 'racist' for talking about these finds I tell them it is not about the people being White, it is about knowing the TRUTH! If the first Americans were shown to be Negroid I would find it equally interesting but people will always complain that you are trying to 'steal' thier history!
Another thing, if you think that this is the "truth" than why do you and others try so hard to discredit natives? I mean, if you believe in what your saying than why would you care about what the true natives think? You know, just because one claim doesn't fit the known fact, doesn't make it true.
There have been remains recently uncovered, for example, Clovis NM, 20,000 B.C., Monte Verde as well as finds in caves in Oregon, 14,500 B.C.. Its funny how thats never brought up when ever this topic is being discussed huh?
So far andy, there is ZERO physical, DNA, artifactual evidence hinting that early Americans are from Europe. The only people with Scientific credentials are Dr. Stanford, and all he has so far is a "hypothesis" based on visual comparison between Solutrean/Clovis spear points. Many disagree with him BTW.
Actually, you are quite wrong in saying that, there is evidence, the famous "X" haplotype which is only found in white people from Europe and the middle east. Look it up in "mystery of the first americans" and "ancient encounters".
@shitonMOHAMMAD ok well that dna has also been found in many dark people of latin america who display dark physical traits but carry "white" genes.. especially inthe middle east a crossroads a hub for mixing and you dont find thes factor all across the board.. when I saw and know personally many people from the arab world some can easily pass for mixed blacks from here or "passers" with the telltale nappy hair.. that aint european!! y would you want it tobe
Just go to the blog-the academic references are there. For example, read the anthropological findings which clearly show the earliest "Americans" showed craniofacial traits of Polynesians, Ainu & Europeans.
Same for areas such as genetics, archeology, conquistador accounts, & Indian folk tales.
What we were taught as children just isn't so.
I used "Caucasoid & white" very specifically. Same for use of "?" marks. Watch it again.
It's the whole pattern of scientific evidence that matters.
Aug 26, 2008. Google the article - "Pre-Incan female Wari mummy unearthed in Peru."
A 1300 yr old mummy w/ a mask w/ blue eyes.
Paragraph #4 "They exposed her face, revealing two big, bright blue orbs in her eye sockets..."
How do we get blue eyes in the Americas 1300 years ago? How would people in the Americas even be aware of blue eyes if not for the presence of people with this trait. This supports our thesis, and runs counter to the establishment theory we have all been taught.
@lemonhide lol are you an idiot,im sure they would have as easaly put red orbs as they did blue ones, those blue orbs meant something else having to do with the sea or the sky.....seriously get over yourselfs
The human race simply doesn't know as much as we think we do. To even begin to learn a glimmering of the truth requires about 3-4 years of very intense research. ...and I'm talking about sixteen hour days of research and study. Ancient history, archeology, linguistics, genographic maps, mythology, science, biology, physics, comparative religious studies,etc., etc., Anyone who comments without having done such research has nothing to add to such discussions.
While I do not subscribe to racist ideologies of any sort or kind (black, brown, pink, or green with purple polka dots, you're still human. Don't forget that one irrefutable fact.) You are absolutely correct, lemonhide. What we were taught just isn't so. The only thing you can rely on is your A, B, C's and 1, 2, 3's...and I often wonder a bit about those. Everything else is founded upon a lie of one sort or another, including religion, evolution, physics and astronomy.
Just go to the blog-the academic references are there. For example, read the anthropological findings which clearly show the earliest "Americans" showed craniofacial traits of Polynesians, Ainu & Europeans.
Same for areas such as genetics, archeology, conquistador accounts, & Indian folk tales.
What we were taught as children just isn't so.
I used "Caucasoid & white" very specifically. Same for use of "?" marks. Watch it again.
It's the whole pattern of scientific evidence that matters.
Just go to the blog-the academic references are there. For example, read the anthropological findings which clearly show the earliest "Americans" showed craniofacial traits of Polynesians, Ainu & Europeans.
Same for areas such as genetics, archeology, conquistador accounts, & Indian folk tales.
What we were taught as children just isn't so.
I used "Caucasoid & white" very specifically. Same for use of "?" marks. Watch it again.
It's the whole pattern of scientific evidence that matters.
Look, us Native Americans were in the Americas first. The skeletons found have caucasoid-like features (long narrow skull, pronounce nose and chin,etc.). Look at the Inuits as well as other Alaska natives, they have long narrow skulls. It doesn't mean that anyone was in the Americas before the Native Americans.
So why are you people trying to destroy evidence? Why did you pay the army to cover the Kennewick site with dirt? And what would low IQ Indians know about archeology or genetics anyway?
What would inbred, low IQ racist crackers know about archeology and genetics? We weren't destroying evidence. Its has been proven that Kennewick man was akin to northeast Asian populations including the Ainu. We are simply reburying remains because its very disrespectful for people to desecrate our ancestors remains. You Christians wouldn't like it if I dug up Jesus and started taking him apart and drilling all kinds of holes in him to study him. You would probably want him to be reburied.
Are you implying that just because a few of skulls are long and narrow that they cant be Native Americans? lol! Maybe some natives did have long narrow skulls.
Of course when scientists find something that predates this "Clovis first" theory their automatically going to presume there were people here before us.
What a load of bullshit. How dare you even bring into question who the first Americans were when it is obvious that the Ancestors of todays American Indians were the first Americans (Fact). So stop filling peoples heads with this white supremacist propaganda bullshit. Even Blacks are claiming to be the first Americans. The oldest Caucasoid-like remains in America are only around 12,000 or 13,000 years old. The oldest Native American remains are over 14,000 years old.
Hey Carl, before I start, I am a Halfrican American and NOT a white supremist. I am however interested in recent advances in our understanding of Indo-Europeans. They didn't spring up from Germany or Sweden and head east. They seemingly sprang up in central Asia and spread prodominantly west. Did they cross the atlantic, hell no. Did even earlier 'caucasoids' living in asia have opportunity to travel across the landbridge in the east I would say yes.
As for wether caucasoids were the first. Who knows? Will you be screaming that it is all a load of bullshit if they dig up an African mummy dating to 35 000 BCE in Monte Verde? What no one can ever take from North American Indians is that they were the most successful peoples to inhabit the Americas. This business of who was first is irrelavant as todays Europeans themselves are migrants to their ancenstral regions (save possibly the Basque). Does that mean they loose rights to europe? I say no.
First of all, a Caucasoid doesn't refer specifically to Europeans. A Caucasoid is basically someone that has a long, narrow skull, pronounced chin, etc. I mean, look at the Eskimos, they have long, narrow skulls but they dont look a thing like a European. Look at the people of India. Their considered Caucasoids but they dont look anything like a European.
Better re read what I said about the peoples I refered to as caucasoids. I said they were of asian decent and not European. So we are in agrement. (BTW never refer to the Inuit as Eskimos they find it distasteful).
"Will you screaming that is all a load of bullshit if they dig up an African mummy dating to 35,000 BCE?" Even if they do find an African mummy in Monte Verde that is 35,000 years old. It still wouldn't mean anyone was here before the Native Americans. Scientists have now discovered that Native Americans have been in America a lot longer than they originally anticipated (at least 50,000 or 60,000 years). The one thing that people will never take from us natives is that we were the first.
Ah, this is the reason for the sensitivity of the subject. Well, if the day comes that archaeologists find irrefutable evidence to the contrary. Don't get too upset. Of all the different types of people that made it across the land bridge your people were the most successful. Your folk and the Inuit mastered these environments. Whether they displaced other inhabitants peacefully or thru agression your people lasted best. Both our peoples have learned that being first doesn't count for shit.
Here we go again. Look, I dought that scientists will ever find "irrefutable" evidence. If there were people living on this continent before us (which I dought because we have always been here) then there would be skeletal remains everywhere. There would have been artifacts lying around everywhere. Which there isn't. Sometimes it amazes me how these "scientists" who supposedly have their phd in this field still manage to come up with some of the most ridiculous, off the wall claims.
Yeah, yeah that's beside the point I was making. There is no such thing as irrefutable evidence... hence it is an analogy. On the flip side of the coin there is no irrefutable evidence that todays indigenous people were the first to arrive. My point is don't get worked up if the prevailing theory doesn't include your people as being first. It doesn't matter. Does a Brit moan and throw a tantrum when he is told he is a new comer to the British Isles? Do the Scotts? Nope. Notta one.
In a way, you are right. There is no such thing as irrefutable evidence. Every piece of evidence found will only arouse more questions. Just as every answer will lead to a question. People are always going to make up theory's to try to explain things that they dont know. Its in human nature.
Yes theories can change as we attain more knowledge - just because something does not fit into the politically correct/established view, this does not make it false! It is the truth and hard fact that is important, regardless of personal feelings/opinions.
You are right andy, its truth, not politically correct crap that matters. I'm simply saying that there is just not enough evidence to say that European were here first. Therefor this claim will remain a THEORY. I do find some of this stuff to be a little disrespectful towards natives, simply because they try to make it look like WE invaded and killed the people who were "supposedly" living here. Just because a few skulls "look" European doesn't make them European.
Neves WA, Hubbe M, Okumura MM, Gonzalez-Jose R, Figuti L, Eggers S, De Blasis PA.
Increasing skeletal evidence from the U.S.A., Mexico, Colombia, and Brazil strongly suggests that the first settlers in the Americas had a cranial morphology distinct from that displayed by most late and modern Native Americans. The Paleoamerican morphological pattern is more generalized and can be seen today among Africans, Australians, and Melanesians.
Here, we present the results of a comparative morphological assessment of a late Paleoindian from Capelinha Burial II, southern Brazil.
In both analyses performed (classical morphometrics and geometric morphometrics), the results show a clear association between Capelinha Burial II and the Paleoindians, as well as Australians, Melanesians, and Africans, confirming its Paleoamerican status.
Sorry but "white" skin, in modern Europeans is a recent adaptation.
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGISTS MEETING:
European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests
Ann Gibbons
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA--At the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago.
What few ancient American skeletons physical anthropologists have been able to study despite obstacles posed by state and federal laws have revealed a surprising degree of diversity, with some resembling modern Indians and others seeming more like the Ainu of Japan, the first group to colonize the archipelago.
Sorry but Caucasian, can not be assigned specifically to "white" Europeans .
Who wore suits of Armor like Knights, who were found buried in Mounds here in North America. I also have heard tale, of Native American Indians, who fought fierce "little people" who were dangerous, and hostile. I do honestly believe, that there are "other" races of men, less commonly seen in modern times, perhaps now extinct?
Research a mini mummy from South America with a smashed skull.
Listen up I am a American Indian. There r a few dicoveries of these types of people. People hav been sailing for thousands of years Polynesians have been the greatest sails since ancient times. On the coast of California we hav stories of trading with visitors on boats. Two canoe type pods decked together with sails. The world was not isolated. We had knowledge of other worlds or lands. Carbon dating is not as accurate as they say
tamalmachakow 2 weeks ago
@Broodrood- YAWN....................if the best you've got is pointing out a type-o, then you're curbside debate skills are lacking in every form of rational thought. But I guess I shouldn't expecting too much, LOL.
1Ephraimite 8 months ago
@Broodrood-
White Euro-PEE-ons have formulated many generic languages, English being one of the most debased of them all. Germananic, Vulgar German, slavic, and the rest of those bastard languages are nothing special.
Bas·tard
Adjective /ˈbastərd/
1.Born of parents not married to each other; illegitimate
2.(of a thing) No longer in its pure or original form; debased
3.(of a handwriting script or typeface) Showing a mixture of different styles
Who owns the Media? Whites (Reds)
1Ephraimite 8 months ago
yea lets beleave a lieing race that lied about
PILTDOWN MAN
rayterry123 1 year ago
"tHOSE ARE ALBINO TRATES"
thaWatcher2011 1 year ago
I could be wrong, but is there not an ancient tale of giants that lived through south America before the Inca?
i remember a kid (back in my school days) arguing with a history teacher saying that America's history was bias and left out many things documented through out history, before the white man started writing.
PPCLOCK 1 year ago
Anyone who has read up on these tales would know that there is very little evidence, and a lot of theory, to support the idea that Anglo-Europeans had ever arrived in pre-historic America. It has been firmly established that the blond and red haired Peruvian mummies were ordinary mummified indians with dark hair that had naturally been died from the acidic environment in which their remains had lain.
akichita87 1 year ago
@akichita87 I'd say that there's zero DNA and artefactual evidence supporting that the Peruvian mummies are European. It's mostly conjecture and wishful thinking by Eurocentrists and Racialists.
Malocosa 1 year ago
The Red headed giants lived in Nevada and California, they were big people, seven to nine feet tall. My videos document them.
rephaim23 1 year ago
Comment removed
queen6852 1 year ago
the first americans were black zulu and spoke spanish
chukurulugai 1 year ago
hahaha just couse they have a straight nose does not mean theyre euro, p.s indians where known to dye their hair too, sooooo fukkkk u white thiefs, this is a culture your not goin to steal like youi did egypt from the blacks
noblewulfff 1 year ago
@noblewulfff "@mr79wilson you know the truth , no matter how many piltdown men you anglo saxon zionist create you know your worth"
what makes you think i am a zionist sir? i oppose jewish nationalism. so how am i a zionist?
mr79wilson 1 year ago
those mumies at 1:07 have their hair dyed,.. nice try you culture thiefs, i mean in your heart you know if its your ppl or not why do you try and say these mumies are white,,they have dyed hair which yes they did dye their hair, and the skull up north just becvouse they have longer skulls you think theyr white, umm hello those idians up there have too gone through evolution,
noblewulfff 1 year ago
@noblewulfff seems to me you are a bit butthurt in light of new evidence ;)
mr79wilson 1 year ago
@mr79wilson you know the truth , no matter how many piltdown men you anglo saxon zionist create you know your worth
noblewulfff 1 year ago
Repeat the smae rubbish enough times and people will start to believe you.
"...with scientific citations when we felt they were appropriate."
LOL!
But no scientific citations when making things up, or when they contradict this pointless "theory".
revansatoda 1 year ago
I love White People.
Luigi84289 2 years ago
this video is just an excuse for racism! humans have probably been coming to america for thousands of years from east and west. who got here first? the witnesses are all dead and didn't document it because the idea was to get food, not win a race! get over it, the gene pool has circulated this planet many times. we're all half breeds!!!!!!
traintaz 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry for the earlier reference, however, none of these artifacts was able to be used since, speculation; was that it was buried/planted by someone in a particular spot on the American continent. I researched this story back in it first came out.
ripmeanewon 2 years ago
Celts were here thousands of years before 1492
Solutreans from Iberia/france thousands of years before that
When I hear those Marxist Brown Nazis spouting they are indigenous whites go back to Europe, that helps to explain the suppression/ cover up of the truth
Lochiel36 2 years ago 2
Don't forget the red haired Hawaiians.
rephaim22 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Kennewick Man currently plays for the L.A. Lakers, and his name is Derek Fisher. FACT!
Malocosa 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Poor whitey......they call themselves Cock-a-zoids
they want patrick stewart as their leader.....tsk tsk tsk
ripmeanewon 2 years ago
LOL ...........funny!
nativepai 2 years ago
How convenient, these (so called mummies) are recently turning up.
I wonder why?
Maybee because they're trying to control the discussion of "Who is what, and who came first".
Devil=Deceiver
Who has dominated the flow of information for centuryies?
1Ephraimite 2 years ago 8
OMG you niggers are just as bad as these crackers....both you fagots are stealing Native American history.
NeCacaluXuxultic 2 years ago
@1Ephraimite
White-hating jews, thats who.
IceAgeColumbus 1 year ago
I thought it was pretty good. I liked the Smithsonian backed "Ice Age Columbus" documentary better, shows that European Caucasoids boated over thousands of years before the Mongoloids from Asia came over a land bridge
Theylivewesleep1984 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
This video is so delusional, it is very entertaining.
OtorongoSalsero 2 years ago
Comment removed
OtorongoSalsero 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LOL Amusing
/watch?v=NqMi9YDRlEI
/watch?v=mVCSttXBapw
OtorongoSalsero 2 years ago
Lets not forget the skull fruads from the past to trick people into believing some rubbish!
history is a repeater.
samir3323 2 years ago
Preach it my brother below, history is for educated people, not politically correct retards. Also, mainstream "history" books say that natives never built in stone, so who do you think erected the megaliths in New England, at mystery hill, etc... not to mention the stone workings at Chaco Canyon (Anasazi). This is just an inkling of what Europeans were doing here. Also, check the so called "indian" serpent mound in Ohio, it had an earlier model in Avebury England (also one in Scotland) !!
EducatedRebellion101 2 years ago
Yeah...... that fuckin' science (reality) and the real world keep getting in the way of non-whites distorted, fanciful beliefs. If it was not for our influence (Europeans) in the Americas...the natives would still be shitting and eating out of the same hole in the ground. That's the reality....it may not be politically correct, but it's the truth.
EuroAmerican2009 2 years ago
White should learn to not live in a world of lie & deception. aka. democracy/politics. Their story keeps changinn every few years. Stick around to see what the "experts" say next.LO fu___ngL.
oldhank2003 2 years ago 4
You found one piece of evidence and the news caster did not say it belonged to europeans either. You're running away with it..... BULL SHIT
sxxxcq 2 years ago
Let the science speak for itself!
logan1776 3 years ago 2
so this only proves white man usta be Indians so what happened 2 make them loose there connection 2 the earth i think it might be cause thy gather dead trees faster then we can plant new trees (LOL) if we find out native Americans Indian's started in England can it bee taken by the people like the Americans done here, if you find a prehistoric pitch fork an sword in pre-America then they were white but if not then they are native indian cause that is a way of life not a color, return 2 native
crazycoyotie 3 years ago
Dec 4, 2008. Google - "Ancient city discovered deep in Amazonian rainforest linked to the legendary white-skinned Cloud People of Peru."
Paragraph #2 "Little is known about the Cloud People of Peru, an ancient, white-skinned civilisation..."
Paragraph #5 "The tribe had white skin and blonde hair...."
White people in the Americas at least many hundreds of years before Christopher Columbus? Again, more info consistent with our (and others') basic thesis...Go to the blog for more...
lemonhide 3 years ago
I believe the cloud people are called the Chachapoyas. you should check out the video on youtube called Our Forgotten History it goes into those people a little bit and also mentions atlantis.
junglemaster2014 3 years ago
@lemonhide lol they were called white becouse they where known as cloud ppl who wore white paint on thier face and as for the blond hair ; the indians as the egyptians had always dyed their hair lighter, lol seriously you ppl are scavengers looking for a culture you can come up on
noblewulfff 1 year ago
An excellent video! When people descry me as being a 'racist' for talking about these finds I tell them it is not about the people being White, it is about knowing the TRUTH! If the first Americans were shown to be Negroid I would find it equally interesting but people will always complain that you are trying to 'steal' thier history!
andy7666 3 years ago
Another thing, if you think that this is the "truth" than why do you and others try so hard to discredit natives? I mean, if you believe in what your saying than why would you care about what the true natives think? You know, just because one claim doesn't fit the known fact, doesn't make it true.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
you say "true" natives which I think sheds light on your own biased thinking. Let the science speak for itself!
logan1776 3 years ago
There have been remains recently uncovered, for example, Clovis NM, 20,000 B.C., Monte Verde as well as finds in caves in Oregon, 14,500 B.C.. Its funny how thats never brought up when ever this topic is being discussed huh?
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
So far andy, there is ZERO physical, DNA, artifactual evidence hinting that early Americans are from Europe. The only people with Scientific credentials are Dr. Stanford, and all he has so far is a "hypothesis" based on visual comparison between Solutrean/Clovis spear points. Many disagree with him BTW.
Malocosa 3 years ago 5
I could have sworn racial types (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid) could be identified through study of the skull, maybe I'm wrong though.
andy7666 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You are wrong,
/watch?v=NqMi9YDRlEI
/watch?v=mVCSttXBapw
OtorongoSalsero 2 years ago
@Malocosa
Actually, you are quite wrong in saying that, there is evidence, the famous "X" haplotype which is only found in white people from Europe and the middle east. Look it up in "mystery of the first americans" and "ancient encounters".
shitonMOHAMMAD 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shitonMOHAMMAD I did look it up and it contradicts what you just said.
Malocosa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shitonMOHAMMAD I did "look it up" and the scientists studying these Peruvian mummies have NOT made any comments that they are European in origin.
Malocosa 1 year ago
@shitonMOHAMMAD ok well that dna has also been found in many dark people of latin america who display dark physical traits but carry "white" genes.. especially inthe middle east a crossroads a hub for mixing and you dont find thes factor all across the board.. when I saw and know personally many people from the arab world some can easily pass for mixed blacks from here or "passers" with the telltale nappy hair.. that aint european!! y would you want it tobe
guapgueezee 1 year ago
@Malocosa
Untrue
IceAgeColumbus 1 year ago
Just go to the blog-the academic references are there. For example, read the anthropological findings which clearly show the earliest "Americans" showed craniofacial traits of Polynesians, Ainu & Europeans.
Same for areas such as genetics, archeology, conquistador accounts, & Indian folk tales.
What we were taught as children just isn't so.
I used "Caucasoid & white" very specifically. Same for use of "?" marks. Watch it again.
It's the whole pattern of scientific evidence that matters.
lemonhide 3 years ago
@lemonhide "white" start from there
noblewulfff 1 year ago
Aug 26, 2008. Google the article - "Pre-Incan female Wari mummy unearthed in Peru."
A 1300 yr old mummy w/ a mask w/ blue eyes.
Paragraph #4 "They exposed her face, revealing two big, bright blue orbs in her eye sockets..."
How do we get blue eyes in the Americas 1300 years ago? How would people in the Americas even be aware of blue eyes if not for the presence of people with this trait. This supports our thesis, and runs counter to the establishment theory we have all been taught.
lemonhide 3 years ago
@lemonhide lol are you an idiot,im sure they would have as easaly put red orbs as they did blue ones, those blue orbs meant something else having to do with the sea or the sky.....seriously get over yourselfs
noblewulfff 1 year ago
The human race simply doesn't know as much as we think we do. To even begin to learn a glimmering of the truth requires about 3-4 years of very intense research. ...and I'm talking about sixteen hour days of research and study. Ancient history, archeology, linguistics, genographic maps, mythology, science, biology, physics, comparative religious studies,etc., etc., Anyone who comments without having done such research has nothing to add to such discussions.
wrb1957 3 years ago
While I do not subscribe to racist ideologies of any sort or kind (black, brown, pink, or green with purple polka dots, you're still human. Don't forget that one irrefutable fact.) You are absolutely correct, lemonhide. What we were taught just isn't so. The only thing you can rely on is your A, B, C's and 1, 2, 3's...and I often wonder a bit about those. Everything else is founded upon a lie of one sort or another, including religion, evolution, physics and astronomy.
wrb1957 3 years ago
Just go to the blog-the academic references are there. For example, read the anthropological findings which clearly show the earliest "Americans" showed craniofacial traits of Polynesians, Ainu & Europeans.
Same for areas such as genetics, archeology, conquistador accounts, & Indian folk tales.
What we were taught as children just isn't so.
I used "Caucasoid & white" very specifically. Same for use of "?" marks. Watch it again.
It's the whole pattern of scientific evidence that matters.
lemonhide 3 years ago
Actually, these mummies were confirmed to be ancient Semitic tribes.
What this video neglected to reveal was these ancient American mummies also had many artifacts buried with them.
Blond hair Semites? Absolutely, the early tribes of Israel were made up of many nomadic tribes from different regions.
In Peru, Solomon era coins were found, as well as well as Jewish burial artifacts.
Recent genetic research has also confirmed current indigenous tribes have Jewish ancestry.
Roscojo 3 years ago
You really sound "authorative". Any facts to back any of this up? I think you're wrong LOL!
rodina988 3 years ago
Just go to the blog-the academic references are there. For example, read the anthropological findings which clearly show the earliest "Americans" showed craniofacial traits of Polynesians, Ainu & Europeans.
Same for areas such as genetics, archeology, conquistador accounts, & Indian folk tales.
What we were taught as children just isn't so.
I used "Caucasoid & white" very specifically. Same for use of "?" marks. Watch it again.
It's the whole pattern of scientific evidence that matters.
lemonhide 3 years ago
Look, us Native Americans were in the Americas first. The skeletons found have caucasoid-like features (long narrow skull, pronounce nose and chin,etc.). Look at the Inuits as well as other Alaska natives, they have long narrow skulls. It doesn't mean that anyone was in the Americas before the Native Americans.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
So why are you people trying to destroy evidence? Why did you pay the army to cover the Kennewick site with dirt? And what would low IQ Indians know about archeology or genetics anyway?
reddwarfski 3 years ago
What would inbred, low IQ racist crackers know about archeology and genetics? We weren't destroying evidence. Its has been proven that Kennewick man was akin to northeast Asian populations including the Ainu. We are simply reburying remains because its very disrespectful for people to desecrate our ancestors remains. You Christians wouldn't like it if I dug up Jesus and started taking him apart and drilling all kinds of holes in him to study him. You would probably want him to be reburied.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Are you implying that just because a few of skulls are long and narrow that they cant be Native Americans? lol! Maybe some natives did have long narrow skulls.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Some tribes could have been visited by people from other cultures. Or, its possible that a few native groups could have multiple origins.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Of course when scientists find something that predates this "Clovis first" theory their automatically going to presume there were people here before us.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
There is even evidence of Native American colonization of America going back over 40,000 years according to DNA and archaeological finds.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
What a load of bullshit. How dare you even bring into question who the first Americans were when it is obvious that the Ancestors of todays American Indians were the first Americans (Fact). So stop filling peoples heads with this white supremacist propaganda bullshit. Even Blacks are claiming to be the first Americans. The oldest Caucasoid-like remains in America are only around 12,000 or 13,000 years old. The oldest Native American remains are over 14,000 years old.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Hey Carl, before I start, I am a Halfrican American and NOT a white supremist. I am however interested in recent advances in our understanding of Indo-Europeans. They didn't spring up from Germany or Sweden and head east. They seemingly sprang up in central Asia and spread prodominantly west. Did they cross the atlantic, hell no. Did even earlier 'caucasoids' living in asia have opportunity to travel across the landbridge in the east I would say yes.
elbowbiter1 3 years ago
As for wether caucasoids were the first. Who knows? Will you be screaming that it is all a load of bullshit if they dig up an African mummy dating to 35 000 BCE in Monte Verde? What no one can ever take from North American Indians is that they were the most successful peoples to inhabit the Americas. This business of who was first is irrelavant as todays Europeans themselves are migrants to their ancenstral regions (save possibly the Basque). Does that mean they loose rights to europe? I say no.
elbowbiter1 3 years ago
First of all, a Caucasoid doesn't refer specifically to Europeans. A Caucasoid is basically someone that has a long, narrow skull, pronounced chin, etc. I mean, look at the Eskimos, they have long, narrow skulls but they dont look a thing like a European. Look at the people of India. Their considered Caucasoids but they dont look anything like a European.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Better re read what I said about the peoples I refered to as caucasoids. I said they were of asian decent and not European. So we are in agrement. (BTW never refer to the Inuit as Eskimos they find it distasteful).
elbowbiter1 3 years ago
"Will you screaming that is all a load of bullshit if they dig up an African mummy dating to 35,000 BCE?" Even if they do find an African mummy in Monte Verde that is 35,000 years old. It still wouldn't mean anyone was here before the Native Americans. Scientists have now discovered that Native Americans have been in America a lot longer than they originally anticipated (at least 50,000 or 60,000 years). The one thing that people will never take from us natives is that we were the first.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Ah, this is the reason for the sensitivity of the subject. Well, if the day comes that archaeologists find irrefutable evidence to the contrary. Don't get too upset. Of all the different types of people that made it across the land bridge your people were the most successful. Your folk and the Inuit mastered these environments. Whether they displaced other inhabitants peacefully or thru agression your people lasted best. Both our peoples have learned that being first doesn't count for shit.
elbowbiter1 3 years ago
Here we go again. Look, I dought that scientists will ever find "irrefutable" evidence. If there were people living on this continent before us (which I dought because we have always been here) then there would be skeletal remains everywhere. There would have been artifacts lying around everywhere. Which there isn't. Sometimes it amazes me how these "scientists" who supposedly have their phd in this field still manage to come up with some of the most ridiculous, off the wall claims.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Yeah, yeah that's beside the point I was making. There is no such thing as irrefutable evidence... hence it is an analogy. On the flip side of the coin there is no irrefutable evidence that todays indigenous people were the first to arrive. My point is don't get worked up if the prevailing theory doesn't include your people as being first. It doesn't matter. Does a Brit moan and throw a tantrum when he is told he is a new comer to the British Isles? Do the Scotts? Nope. Notta one.
elbowbiter1 3 years ago
In a way, you are right. There is no such thing as irrefutable evidence. Every piece of evidence found will only arouse more questions. Just as every answer will lead to a question. People are always going to make up theory's to try to explain things that they dont know. Its in human nature.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago
Yes theories can change as we attain more knowledge - just because something does not fit into the politically correct/established view, this does not make it false! It is the truth and hard fact that is important, regardless of personal feelings/opinions.
andy7666 3 years ago
You are right andy, its truth, not politically correct crap that matters. I'm simply saying that there is just not enough evidence to say that European were here first. Therefor this claim will remain a THEORY. I do find some of this stuff to be a little disrespectful towards natives, simply because they try to make it look like WE invaded and killed the people who were "supposedly" living here. Just because a few skulls "look" European doesn't make them European.
carlthemachoman 3 years ago 3
People might want to start doing their own research, before just jumping on the band wagon.
The information is out there, science does in fact tell us, with certainty, who the indigenous people were.
The information, is not hidden history.
KnowledgeisKey626 3 years ago
J Hum Evol. 2005
Apr;48(4):403-14.
Neves WA, Hubbe M, Okumura MM, Gonzalez-Jose R, Figuti L, Eggers S, De Blasis PA.
Increasing skeletal evidence from the U.S.A., Mexico, Colombia, and Brazil strongly suggests that the first settlers in the Americas had a cranial morphology distinct from that displayed by most late and modern Native Americans. The Paleoamerican morphological pattern is more generalized and can be seen today among Africans, Australians, and Melanesians.
KnowledgeisKey626 3 years ago
J Hum Evol. 2005
Apr;48(4):403-14.
Continued:
Here, we present the results of a comparative morphological assessment of a late Paleoindian from Capelinha Burial II, southern Brazil.
In both analyses performed (classical morphometrics and geometric morphometrics), the results show a clear association between Capelinha Burial II and the Paleoindians, as well as Australians, Melanesians, and Africans, confirming its Paleoamerican status.
KnowledgeisKey626 3 years ago
Sorry but "white" skin, in modern Europeans is a recent adaptation.
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGISTS MEETING:
European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests
Ann Gibbons
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA--At the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago.
KnowledgeisKey626 3 years ago
ANTHROPOLOGY:
Kennewick Man's Contemporaries
Virginia Morell
What few ancient American skeletons physical anthropologists have been able to study despite obstacles posed by state and federal laws have revealed a surprising degree of diversity, with some resembling modern Indians and others seeming more like the Ainu of Japan, the first group to colonize the archipelago.
Sorry but Caucasian, can not be assigned specifically to "white" Europeans .
KnowledgeisKey626 3 years ago
Well, in truth, I have heard tale,
of giant White men. Red beards.
Who wore suits of Armor like Knights, who were found buried in Mounds here in North America. I also have heard tale, of Native American Indians, who fought fierce "little people" who were dangerous, and hostile. I do honestly believe, that there are "other" races of men, less commonly seen in modern times, perhaps now extinct?
Research a mini mummy from South America with a smashed skull.
The dead don't lie.
ISRAELITECHURCH 3 years ago
all science has value.
acerb45666555 3 years ago
Maybe it is true who knows.
I don't think we can ever know the truth without our own scientific equipment and our own first hand analysis of the mummies.
If it is true, then it's true.
If it's not true, then it's not true.
Without the bodies and the euipment,
all we can do is read, watch, and speculate.
ISRAELITECHURCH 3 years ago 2