Authored by: spinoza on Saturday, February 06 2010 @ 06:01 PM GMT+5

Interesting that 'crones' has the connotation of wisdom and benevolence, while 'cronies' carries a sense of sleaze and entitlement in regards to politics.

Authored by: SpudHill on Saturday, February 06 2010 @ 06:25 PM GMT+5

Was the word "crones" picked by Franklin or the author?
Odd choice of words as it is not an Indian word but rather comes from Middle English usually not defined as an old woman but as an ugly withered old woman or a hag and has a negative connotation.

Authored by: tomaidh on Saturday, February 06 2010 @ 08:19 PM GMT+5

Interesting question.
I found a similar story from a different source, sans
crones:
The Means Assures the End. Do the Good!
Imagine Community
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Colonial Scrip: Principles of Paper Fiat Currency

Benjamin Franklin attended an Iroquois Nation Pow
Wow when he was a young man and was very
inspired by the separation of powers he found in their
governance, which was an inspiration for our republic.
While he was there a brave came into the camp
laden down with Wampum which he proceed to give
to the chief, who distributed it to all the chiefs of the
tribes and clans. The chief recognized the question
Ben Franklin had and explained to him that in Indian
culture wampum is not money, but is used to make
flags and belts to commemorate and remember all
the events and gifts that are given during the year.
“Of course, there always has to be enough wampum
to make all the ceremonial mementos we use to
honor our gifts to each other.” Ben Franklin realized
in that instant that “There always has to be enough
money for all the transactions the people want to
make”. He became a major advocate of fiat paper
money, called Colonial Scrip, and attributed the
prosperity the colonists enjoyed, to its use.

Authored by: Rolf on Saturday, February 06 2010 @ 07:12 PM GMT+5

THEY HAD HAD A THOUSAND YEARS OF PEACE AND PROSPERITY,

Well, peace within the 5 Iroquois nations maybe, but not peace in the sense it is usually understood.

Their oral tradition and archeological evidence both support the idea that the peace they were able to forge among themselves allowed them to invade lands of the Algonquians and other tribes.

Yes, invade, as in conquest, capture, wars of expulsion, the usual human pursuits of every continent except Antartica.









---
Dreams Trump Video

Authored by: paulgardner on Saturday, February 06 2010 @ 09:57 PM GMT+5

I have a feeling we've discussed this here before.

The Iroquois constitution influenced our own.
You can read more at the following sites:

http://tuscaroras.com/pages/history/about_iroquois_constitution.html

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/CULAMRCA/IRLEAGUE.HTM

http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/

Authored by: SpudHill on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 06:08 AM GMT+5

Well this would fit since we've generally, except for that pesky civil war, managed to live as states in peace but feel free to attempt to conquer outside peoples so Rolf statement and yours both stand together I would say.

Authored by: tomaidh on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 02:27 PM GMT+5

In 1984, Mohawk Chief Jake Swamp and researcher Gregory Schaaf Ph.D, published a book which theorized that the Constitution was patterned on the Iroquois “Great Law of Peace”.( The U.S. Constitution and the Great Law of Peace: A Comparison of Two Founding Documents)

Schaff describes the book as follows:

To better analyze the similarities and differences between the Great Law of Peace and the U.S. Constitution, a project began in 1980 to organize the two documents in two columns showing the parallel passages side by side. The comparison clearly illustrated similarities and differences in the two founding documents. In 1987, the evidence was submitted as testimony before U.S. Senate hearings on the origins of the Constitution. For the first time in history, Congress officially recognized that the U.S. government was "explicitly modeled" after the Iroquois Confederacy (Congressional Record, 1987).

Comparisons with the Great Law of Peace allow students to see the U.S. Constitution in a new light. Featuring high qualifications for leadership, political rights for women, and a remarkable system of justice, the Great Law of Peace may inspire people to reconsider the founding principles of the United States. For example, why were the rights of women guaranteed in the Great Law of Peace, but denied under the original U.S. Constitution? The logical conclusion would be a difference in philosophy regarding fundamental human rights. Under the Iroquois system slavery was illegal. There were no taxes or prisons. The recognition of equal rights for all was the law.

Iroquois women to this day hold greater rights in accordance with the Great Law of Peace, than their non-Indian female counterparts under the U.S. Constitution. Interviews with Iroquois clan mothers revealed their Native philosophy. Women choose the leaders, because they devote the most time to raising the babies. Women have veto power over war, because they give birth and respect the sanctity of life in a special way. Land title is passed down through the women, because one always knows for certain who the mother is. Iroquois social structure is matrilineal and land title is passed down through the women.

The women nominate men for leadership positions based on the following qualities: "The Chief Statesmen shall be mentors of the people for all time. . . . Their hearts shall be full of peace and good will, and their minds filled with a yearning for the welfare of the people. . . . With endless patience they shall carry out their duty, and their firmness shall be tempered with a tenderness for their people. Neither anger nor fury shall find lodgment in their minds, and all their words and actions shall be marked by calm deliberation"

The clan mothers explained why warriors and war chiefs were forbidden from being civil leaders: If you choose a war leader to be a leader in your civil government and your country is constantly at war, whom do you have to blame but yourselves?

http://www.historyandtheheadlines.abc-clio.com/ContentPages/ContentPage.aspx?entryId=1171741&currentSection=1161468&productid=5

Authored by: Maus Anon E on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 10:00 AM GMT+5

***except Antartica.***

Yet.

---
We Rock!

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 10:28 AM GMT+5

Hey, I have an idea!

Let's build our cities in a more orderly fashion, like the Aztec. Also, lets
have sacrifices of humans, preferably those outsider tribal groups that we
conquer, on a regular basis---in a ritual fashion with lots of pain and
suffering and the ripping out of vital organs.

AND WE CALL THE AZTECS [insert whatever term turns you on
here]!!!!!!!!!!

Authored by: Floyd on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 10:45 AM GMT+5

This country regularly practices human sacrifice as a part
of what we like to refer to as "the national interest".

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 10:58 AM GMT+5

Given that homo sapiens has only had civilization for a few thousand
years, I'm not surprised that things haven't been perfect, or even
broadly humane, in ANY human societies, among ANY skin color
groups or cultural collections of humans who have chosen to settle in
large groupings.

Maybe in another 50,000 years, if we humans can keep from killing
each other off, but there has never been an "Eden" or utopia, unless
you believe in the mythology of various religious dogma.

We're all humans and we all share the same DNA and physiology, no
matter what kandy-koated kulture we happen to inhabit, some a little
more humane than others.

Authored by: Rolf on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 11:09 AM GMT+5

"We're all humans and we all share the same DNA and physiology, no
matter what kandy-koated kulture we happen to inhabit, some a little
more humane than others."

Well, some a lot more humane than others.

---
Dreams Trump Video

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 11:17 AM GMT+5

I don't think entire groupings of either ethnic or national or cultural
groups can be generalized in such a fashion. I think when people do this
they are bigots.

I will say that some cultures have good ideas and some nations practice
better or more humane policies than others at different times in human
history, but nobody has a monopoly on evil or on good. That's my point.

Authored by: paulgardner on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 11:51 AM GMT+5

First of all, it's Franken, not Frankin.

Second, our European ancestors did shove aside the previous inhabitants of these lands - that's a fact.
They justified their actions with a lot of pious poppycock - didn't have the balls to simply say, "we want this land so we're taking it." Instead there was a lot of moralizing that went on and that's where Tom's comment is directed, I think. If they were so bad, we have a moral duty to prove we are better and one could argue we've failed to do that.
Clearly the old inhabitants warred with one another so they weren't perfect (and no indoor plumbing which was known among Europeans sporadically back to Roman times).

Third, why so sensitive? It's not like the Iroquois are a threat. We should be able to discuss the relative merits of different cultures without talking about "blame".

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 12:35 PM GMT+5

Kudos to you on catching my misspelling of Al's last name. Savor the
flavor.

The point is, before the Europeans got here in 1000 AD, 1492 AD, and
points afterward in different shock waves, the inhabitants of Cro
Magnons who had migrated here from Asia (our human relatives BTW)
had imperialism, a calendar (the Aztec for example), writing and
economic trade, agriculture, urbanism, AND killing, sacrifice, warfare
and violence. They even practiced genocide against other tribal
groups!

So, although I would be the last person to romanticize the Europeans,
who smelled bad, ate poorly, and practiced a strange religion with a
cross that said they were superior to all others, I would not
romanticize the "Native" Americans either. It's a common trap that
many Americans (or United Statesians) get themselves into, sort of a
form of: "Well, the pro-European version of history that we were
taught pre-1950 was bogus, so that must mean that the opposite was
true: that the Indians or Native Americans were more noble people."
This is romanticist claptrap. It's also lazy historical analysis, made to
feel good, based on emotive projection and not on archaeological or
anthropological fact.

Take the Iroquois observation of Franklin's: he attended the
conference in Albany before the Revolution and met many Iroquois,
learned how their federation worked, and was inspired by it. So far, so
good. It WAS an innovative system. But what the original poster
glosses over or ignores is that outside of this federation, the unified
tribes conquered and dominated, imperialist-style, or they tolerated
for a time if they could not defeat them (Powhattan Confederacy for
ex.) until a later time when they could defeat them. By defeat them,
I mean in warfare and subjugation of their conquered women and
children.

Let's discuss history accurately, without the romanticist gloss that is
full of bias and distortion.

Authored by: vtstream on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 03:04 PM GMT+5

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 03:34 PM GMT+5

Straw man alert:
I NEVER said that the Indians were not as interesting as the
Europeans!

I remain skeptical of claims that any native Americans reached Europe
by boat or ice flow since there is simply no evidence of this. I do
know that what is now England was connected by land to the continent
of Europe at the end of the last ice age, 10,000 years ago, and that
what is now the North Sea was once dry land, as was the Baltic in
places and the Black Sea, etc. But to travel from North America to
Europe, although not impossible, seems a bit of a stretch. The natives
of Northern Europe, the Lapps, migrated from the East, from Asia, to
northern Scandinavia. The Inuit (Eskimos) were still in the process of
migrating Eastward into Greenland when the Norse arrived in the
Southern tip of Greenland to settle, around 900 CE. Iceland had never
been reached (as far as we know) by any "Asian/Indian Americans"
prior to either the Irish monks and/or the Norse arrival, within the last
1200-1300 years.

I think this is a bit of wishful thinking, like the outrageous claims by
Scandinavian-Americans 100 years ago that the Norse reached what is
now Minnesota, 1000 years ago. They base this claim on a now
discredited "Kensington Stone" which was faked by a Norwegian-
American farmer. Archaeological proof by Helge Ingstad however
DOES prove that the Norse reached northern Newfoundland, and built
a camp there. They also probably reached as far as New Brunswick,
based on seed remains and a burl found in the camp that only grow in
New Brunswick.

If you want to look at some people who REALLY kicked ass in distance
travel, look at the Polynesians. They travelled in open boats and got
all the way across the Pacific, reaching Easter Island and Hawaii
before anyone else, and without modern navigational tools.

As for people getting from the Americas to Africa or Europe, it just
doesn't seem likely, and there is no good evidence to show that this
happened. For a good book on the Americas before the Europeans,
you may want to read "1491" by Charles Mann. Another great book
about Europe, and the world, pre-Ice and post-Ice Age, which I
HIGHLY RECOMMEND, is called "After the Ice: A Global Human
History 20,000 - 5000 BC" by Steven Mithen. It's available at the
library in town. I could not put this book down! When I was a kid in
the D.C. suburbs, I found a projectile point that the county
archaeologist told me was from the Woodland Period (at least 5,000
years old) and he also told me that they used to hunt mammoths in
D.C. thousands of years ago. It made me realize how insignificant our
time here on the planet is, how even though human history has been
short compared to other species, it is a long history when you
compare it to European encroachment. Also, there was a LOT of
culture and history going on over here in the Americas before the
Europeans, before even Kenniwick Man, arrived.

Still, I find the history of Europe and of European civilization to be
equally fascinating, particularly because that is my ancestry. I don't
think any one group is better than another though.

Authored by: tomaidh on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 03:58 PM GMT+5

America’s First Christmas Card by Mike McCormack June 20th, 2005
When was the first Christmas message printed in America? It had to come with European Christians, but who were the first Europeans in America? Did they come with Columbus, or did they come earlier with the Vikings; or even earlier with a band of Irish monks? The Navagatio, Saint Brendan’s account of his travels across the Atlantic, certainly predates the Viking voyages by some 400 years and establishes Irish visitors as early as the Sixth Century A.D., but no evidence had ever been found to support that claim. That lack of hard evidence led author Timothy Severin to duplicate the voyage of Brendan in 1977, in a leather-covered boat built to Brendan’s specifications, but unfortunately, that did little to convince the sceptics.
However, while the sceptics argued that possibility and probability do not offer proof, startling discoveries were being made in the New England states of New Hampshire and Vermont that altered the entire subject. A complex of ancient stone buildings, burial tombs, and oracle chambers, which had been under study for some time, were revealed to be Celtic — not from the time of Brendan, but as far back as 800 B.C.!
The evidence was overwhelming. Scores of inscriptions found at the sites were identified as Ogham — a system of cypher used by the Celts over 2500 years ago. Using the science of epigraphy — the study of ancient carvings on stone — Dr. Barry Fell, Harvard professor and president of the Epigraphic Society, not only identified the inscriptions, but translated them. Some identified graves, while others, taken from an oracle chamber, contained religious writings, and still others concerned land boundaries. Together, they indicated a Celtic settlement in America when that form of Ogham was in use, sometime after 800 B.C.
Further, great standing stones, surrounding one of the sites, are geometrically aligned for viewing such celestial events as the summer and winter solstices and seasonal star and lunar patterns. The parallel to Newgrange and similar structures in Ireland is remarkable. In addition to local Indian words and place names with Celtic roots, the defining and dating of pottery, tools, and implements found at the site, also confirm the settlement to be Celtic, matching items produced in the Celtic regions of western Europe during the Bronze Age.
The conclusion that a Celtic society existed in America before the time of Christ is indisputable, but what has that to do with a Christmas Card? Well, Dr. Fell released a book on his initial discoveries, entitled America B.C., and a sequence of events followed which immensely added to the evidence of another group of early settlers, and the Christmas Card they left behind.
Ida Jane Gallagher, a native West Virginian working as a free-lance historian in Connecticut, forwarded to Dr. Fell an article that she had received from the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce. The article described a stone carving in Wyoming County, West Virginia, similar to the ones she had photographed in New England. Discovered by two amateur archeologists in 1964, the carving was examined in 1970 by a Geological survey team, who concluded that the inscription — whatever its meaning — was the work of early Indians or aborigines, and of no significance, since many such undeciphered carvings existed, whose origins are shrouded in mystery. The find was forgotten for a decade until archeologist Robert Pyle learned of its existence from his assistant Tony Shields.
Shields, a former Wyoming County resident, told Pyle of carvings near his home that were similar to old runic writings. When he produced photos of the carvings as proof, an excited Pyle estimated that they had been carved between 500 and 800 A.D. Beginning in March 1982, Pyle and Shields recorded every detail of the carving in eighteen separate visits. Convinced of its importance, Pyle gave the story to a local newspaper; the editorial and photo that subsequently appeared was clipped by a reader who sent it to the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce magazine. They, in turn, sent it to Ida Jane Gallagher. She immediately arranged to visit the site.
In November 1982, Pyle led a small group up a steep bank in West Virginia to a rock ledge, and Gallagher took her first look at the 10-foot inscription carved on a recessed portion of a cliff face beneath a natural rock overhang. Convinced that it was a major find, she contacted Professor Fell, and he agreed to attempt a translation.
When Dr. Fell saw the petroglyph, he immediately recognized it as an advanced form of the Ogham script he had seen in Ireland and on the New England carvings. He began a translation from Ogham into Old Irish, from Old Irish into modern Irish, and then into English.
The message thus deciphered read:
At the time of sunrise, a ray grazes the notch on the left side on Christmas Day, the first season of the year, the season of the blessed advent of the savior Lord Christ. Behold he is born of Mary, a woman.
According to the translation, the carving was a solar calendar bearing a Christmas message! But how could a Christmas message be carved in America, in an Irish script, between 500 and 800 A.D.? Was there a mistake? The small group decided to verify the translation. Calculating the difference between the Julian calendar (used until the 16th Century) and today’s Gregorian calendar, they met at the petroglyph just before sunrise on December 22, 1982. Quietly they waited as the sun climbed in the east, spilled over the mountains, and streamed its rays toward the cliff face before them. They watched in amazement as the first shaft of sunlight funnelled like a flashlight beam through a 3-sided notch in the cliff overhang and struck the center of a sun symbol on the left side of the panel. As they watched in awe, the beam pushed the shadow from left to right, slowly bathing the entire message in sunlight like a prehistoric neon sign announcing yet another Christmas, as it has done for centuries. Before their eyes, they had received a message across the ages.
Subsequent visits showed that the phenomenon only occurred at the winter solstice; and at other times of the year the sun only partially lit the message. In 1985, the distinguished Celtic scholar, Professor Robert T. Meyer visited the site and responded to a question regarding its authenticity in these words:
Nobody could have faked this sort of thing unless they had a very deep knowledge of Celtic philosophy, for this is very archaic, and probably from the sixth or seventh centuries. This, for Celtic scholars, is probably at least as important as the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls . . . because it shows that Irish Monks, I suppose, came here, I would say, about 1500 years ago.
Since that time, other Ogham carvings have been discovered in West Virginia at Bears’s Fork in Fayette County and Horse Creek in Boone’s County; as well as at Red River Gorge in Kentucky; Shell Rock Canyon, Colorado, and Newfoundland!
As for the Wyoming County petroglyph, it remains for all to see: America’s first Christmas message, left between 500 and 800 A.D., by Irish Christian missionaries. We may never know the identity of the person or persons who carved the message, but the fact that it exists, provides important proof of the old claim that Irish monks sailed to America to spread the gospel long before Columbus and the Vikings. An Irish monk named Brendan wrote of that in the Sixth Century, but no one believed him. Now, in view of the earlier settlements found in New England, it should be obvious that the Irish had the map all along.

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 04:31 PM GMT+5

This sounds a bit farfetched.

Incidentally, those "Vikings" who reached N. America were no longer
technically "Vikings" but were Norse in culture, and by the time of the
landings in Newfoundland, were mostly Catholic, having been
"Christianized" by around 950 CE. But here's where the Celtic pride
thing can be played: Those Norse who settled Iceland were a hybrid of
Celt and Nordic peoples, because the Norse who settled Iceland didn't
come directly from Norway, but from Ireland and Scotland, and the
Faroe Islands. They had by then intermarried with Celts. Today, the
population of Iceland is half Celtic and half Nordic.

There have been claims that the Irish (Celts) reached Iceland before
the Norse, and they may have. They may even have reached
Greenland first, but there is no evidence. Also, claims that they
reached N. America seem to be dubious. I never say "never" however;
just improbable. If they DID reach North America, it would be more
likely that they would have drifted to Newfoundland as that was more
reachable by sea, but West Virginia??!! Sounds like a "Kensington
Stone" story to me...

Authored by: Rolf on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 06:42 PM GMT+5

As we have our very own Putney Mystery stone structures, I was as intrigued by this, as I was skeptical.

All of the below citations are from from Wikipedia.

The first paragraph below was what I was expecting to find....

"Fell's epigraphic work was not well-received in academia.[3][4] Critics of Fell's work routinely dismissed him as an amateur, pointing out his lack of formal training in ancient scripts and languages.[5]"


It turns out that Barry Fell Phd, had a Phd in . . . . zoology. Zoology is cool. But it aint epigraphics.

The next paragraphbelow likewise was about what I had anticipated.


"One example of Fell's claims is his contention in Saga America that Brendan of Clonfert may have reached North America centuries before Columbus. This is based on Fell's translation, published in the magazine Wonderful West Virginia in 1983, of two rock-cut inscriptions located at archaeological sites in Wyoming County, West Virginia. According to Fell, these inscriptions narrate the story of Christ's nativity and are written in an old Irish script called Celtic Ogham (also referred to as Ogam), dating back to the 6th or 8th century AD.[7] This led to the publication of articles in the journal The West Virginia Archeologist that were highly critical of Fell's conclusions and methodology, including a 1983 article by archaeologist and historian W. Hunter Lesser describing Fell's claims as pseudoscientific and unreliable.[8] In 1989 lawyers Monroe Oppenheimer and Willard Wirtz wrote an article based on opinions of academic archaeologists and linguists to dispute that the inscription is written in Ogam script. They further accused Fell of deliberate fraud.[9]

Oh dear.

But this last paragraph turned my head, well at least the last couple of sentences.

David H. Kelley, an archaeologist at the University of Calgary who is credited with a major breakthrough in the decipherment of Mayan glyphs, complained about Fell in a 1990 essay: "Fell's work [contains] major academic sins, the three worst being distortion of data, inadequate acknowledgment of predecessors, and lack of presentation of alternative views."

Here comes the amazing, (or at least it was amazing to me)

"In the same essay, however, Kelley went on to state that "I have no personal doubts that some of the inscriptions which have been reported are genuine Celtic ogham." Kelley concluded: "Despite my occasional harsh criticism of Fell's treatment of individual inscriptions, it should be recognized that without Fell's work there would be no [North American] ogham problem to perplex us. We need to ask not only what Fell has done wrong in his epigraphy, but also where we have gone wrong as archaeologists in not recognizing such an extensive European presence in the New World."[10]


WOW. Ok, it's not a widely held opinion among scientists, but it is rather interesting coming from someone as critical of Fell and as of high academic stature as Kelley.

---
Dreams Trump Video

Authored by: vtstream on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 06:11 PM GMT+5

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 07:15 PM GMT+5

"Perhaps no "good" evidence. But as to it being likely? Throw a
message in a bottle out to sea on the easternmost point of Gaspe and
where does it go? It travels up the gulf stream toward Iceland, then
down to Ireland."


Yeah, but where is the evidence? This is just speculation.

"The natural currents flow north and east. Which way do the prevailing
winds blow? The same. These two physical facts, although not "good
evidence" would seem to point out that it is less likely that a Viking,
with their square rigged downwind only sails would have easily made
it west, though they apparently did, though at a much later date than
the 5000 years ago we are speculating about."

The ships were Knorrs, and the sailors were Norse, not Vikings. The
people sailing these ships were a mixture of Celt and Nordic, because
they came from the British Isles-to-Faeroes-to-Iceland-to-Greenland.
The expeditions to Newfoundland didn't START in Europe; they
STARTED in Greenland, as a jumping off point. Nobody was sailing
directly from Europe to N. America then.


"Other cultural similarities between the Celts and North American
Indians hint of connections but we may never know for sure."


I'm open to proof, but this is again just speculation.

"There are numerous "ruins" throughout New England that have been
attributed to the Celts. It's possible that it is the other way around
and in some cases seems more likely."

No proofs yet, just speculation, and not very good speculation at that.

"There are petroglyphs showing a log ship in Peterborough, Ontario
that date to possibly before the last ice age."

Before the last ice age, there was probably NOBODY going across the
Atlantic Ocean. It was extremely difficult. Can you show me a link to
the Peterborough, Ontario petroglyph?

"Oral traditions, stories, myths and spiritual beliefs that overlap the
Celtic culture with American Indian culture are evident."

Oral speculation.

"I prefer to keep my mind open about such things because I honestly
don't know for sure who went where in the past. It is interesting to
see how cultural bias can write history in different ways and that
something like a great discovery of a new land can be lauded as a
high achievement from one vantage point and seen as a death knell
from another"

I prefer to keep an open mind too, but I require proofs. That's the
difference. Cultural bias has nothing to do with it, as far as I am
concerned. I don't have any human cultural group in the hunt here.
I'm just interested in provable facts. You can't prove that the Celts
sailed here before the Norse, and all you can offer is speculation. The
Norse have a site in L'Anse aux Meadows which can be dated and
verified. The Celts don't have anything like this. My open mind says to
me: Norse definitely in Newfoundland at about 1000 CE; Celts, others
no proof.

This is what I mean by people having emotional wishful thinking that
trumps reality. Show me the evidence is all I ask. Until then, it's all
just speculation, and not very good speculation at that.

Authored by: vtstream on Monday, February 08 2010 @ 12:37 AM GMT+5

It is speculation. True.
I checked out the Peterborough petroglyphs. Could not find a photo of the ship(boat?) but they are very interesting none the less. I've only seen a drawing of the petroglyph.

Funny how truth can change even over a relatively short time. I saw Neil Armstrong walk on the moon. Well actually I saw a tv broadcast of it. Now the original tapes have gone missing and some have presented very convincing evidence that we never went to the moon at all. Even though I saw it happen, I can't know for sure that it did. Of course Armstrong stepped on the moon...didn't he?

I personally doubt that North Americans traveled to Europe 5000 years ago. I'm keeping an open mind in case the tape turns up.

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Monday, February 08 2010 @ 09:31 AM GMT+5

Good news, vtstream!

There ARE photos taken from space which show some of the lunar
landing sites, so you can put your fears to rest.
http://www.squidoo.com/apollo-moon-landing-photos-from-space

I wonder if anyone doubts American technology when it comes to the
atomic bomb? I mean, it's way too difficult to pull off a nuclear
explosion like that, right? It's all just Einsteinian THEORY. Oh, wait---
there are film clips showing these events taking place, and they don't
appear to have been faked.

How about Lindbergh actually flying solo, across the Atlantic, in 1927?
? No Way!! Nobody SAW him do it, except for some people in America
and then in Ireland when his plane just "appeared" from nowhere.
Maybe Lindy had a ship meet him and take him most of the way?
Hmmmmmm.....

Authored by: vtstream on Monday, February 08 2010 @ 10:55 PM GMT+5

Well I'm pretty sure man went to the moon.
But is there any value to oral tradition?
How can we know that something in the past happened
even though there is no longer any physical evidence?
Are memories ever embedded in our psyche that have their source in another time? Are these patterns of thought physical? I think they are.

We can know things we have never learned. Its called instinct. How can this be if there is no physical evidence?

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Tuesday, February 09 2010 @ 09:12 AM GMT+5

There certainly IS value to oral traditions, in my opinion.

Take the story of the "flood" in the Bible. The Old Testament is based
on oral tradition, as before the advent of writing, history was passed
down via word of mouth, often in elaborately embellished (rhythmic
for ease of repetition) tales. The Greeks did this too.

One particular story interests me which is told almost EXACTLY the
same as the story in Genesis (which is in two parts; one older than
the other). This is the 'flood' story, which is also in an earlier
mythology than the Bible, the Epic of Gilgamesh. What Middle East
historians speculate is that the flood could have been a number of
things, but one intriguing story is how the Black Sea formed, which
was within human memory. It had been dry land until about 6-7,000
years ago, when sea levels rose from ice melt as the glaciers
retreated. The Mediterranean Sea rose to the point that it reached the
narrow point of land at what is today the Hellespont (sp?) in what is
now Turkey. It broke violently and suddenly, a force heard for miles.
It swamped with brutal force the lands and villages which are today on
the floor of the Black Sea. People fled for miles, some southward into
the Middle East of modern Syria and Iraq, others north into the
Balkans and Russia. The story was passed down through word of
mouth. It got embellished and changed into myth, but the core of the
story probably had some real historic origins.

Similarly, there are stories in North America which bear reading into,
but we must be careful not to read too literally these stories, as they
are embellished with myth and cultural elements that we can get
confused by.

Even as recently as the Norse Saga times (1000 CE) in a time of
writing, there were at least two versions of the story of Leif Eriksson's
trip to "Vinland". They contradict each other and are of dubious
accuracy, and these are just 1000 years old. There are core elements
in each that may be of value, but to read them literally is to tread in
unstable waters, historically. Being only 1000 years old however, they
are probably more accurate (having been written down sooner from
the core story) than the older Biblical stories of Genesis, which are
distorted to the point of almost complete mythology.

Authored by: Rolf on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 11:26 AM GMT+5

Perhaps the saddest supposedly true story I ever read was of an island tribe in the pacific southeast which apparently produced a visionary prophet who preached pacifism.

Personally, I think that pacifism is not to be dismissed merely on the grounds of its political outcomes in the face of organized violence, which is part of why I cried when I read that this tribe was subjugated and, well, eaten by the Maori.

Who lived to tell the tale?

I know not. I read the account in an encyclopedia. Doesn't make it true of course.

Rolf

---
Dreams Trump Video

Authored by: Mr. Buddy Love on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 11:34 AM GMT+5

I think that over the course of time, as human civilization evolves,
pacifism will win out over warring and bloodshed. Pacifism requires a
higher level of sophistication, something that may have appeared in fits
and starts over millennia, but has never been the dominant way of
human societies----yet. But again, since all of humanity is still so young
in the evolutionary scheme of animal and plant life on earth, we will
have to collectively give civilization more time, if indeed, as I said
above, we don't kill ourselves off first, through nuclear or environmental
catastrophe, as Jared Diamond has written in "Collapse".

Authored by: tomaidh on Sunday, February 07 2010 @ 08:21 PM GMT+5

And then there's the Mandans, a tribe encountered
by Lewis and Clark somewhere near the confluence of
the Mississippi and Missouri rivers.
The Mandans and their language received much
attention from Euro-Americans because of their
lighter skin and eye color, causing some to speculate
they were of European origin. Maximilian of Wied
spent more time recording Mandan over all other
Siouan languages and additionally prepared a
comparison list of Mandan and Welsh words (he
thought that the Mandan may be displaced Welsh).
Artist George Catlin believed the Mandan were the
"Welsh Indians" of folklore, descendants of Prince
Madoc and his followers who emigrated to America
from Wales in about 1170. This view was very
popular at the time but has since been disputed by
the bulk of scholarship.
In his journal, William Clark described a sacred
Mandan artifact which he identified as an ancient
Roman silver coin.