PDA

View Full Version : Who were the indigenous Americans?


diggy
05-23-2009, 01:37 AM
9XVg6teDnZY&feature=related

LORD NOSE
05-23-2009, 12:37 PM
thanks

diggy
05-23-2009, 09:53 PM
Your welcome.

gengoro
05-24-2009, 11:44 AM
How did they even get there though? Humans werent around during pangea.

diggy
05-24-2009, 08:11 PM
The people at the time of the Olmec, were a sea traveling people. This is something euro centric history does not teach. So if they did not get to what is called the Americas by walking to it, it was by sea travel.

Koolish
05-24-2009, 09:10 PM
cutting things out of history is nothing new for sure, just like how people have been smoking weed longer than just the 20th century, but that's what you grow up thinking.

LoTec
05-24-2009, 11:00 PM
How did they even get there though? Humans werent around during pangea.

Obviously they are alleging that Homo-Sapieans were around during pangea. THis is interesting Ive never heard this before. They really didnt provide much proof for their theory. I have heard that people possibly sailed to South America before anyone migrated on the land bridge.

whitey
05-25-2009, 12:42 AM
i didnt watch the vid. but im guessing it was black people.

Olive Oil Goombah
05-27-2009, 03:46 PM
just as many classrooms are 'eurocentric' so too is this forum 'afrocentric'.

DUMBO
05-27-2009, 03:49 PM
black people hate native americans. or at least, let's say they just don't give a fuck about dem niggas' history and love to trample over that shit.

diggy
05-27-2009, 11:29 PM
black people hate native americans. or at least, let's say they just don't give a fuck about dem niggas' history and love to trample over that shit.


^^Not a true statement.

battle?
05-27-2009, 11:32 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuOgj6Eteag

Visionz
05-28-2009, 12:13 AM
9XVg6teDnZY&feature=related
Do you take what's presented here to be fact?

Part of what's presented here is claiming that human have been here on earth in the neighborhood of atleast 200 million years ago.

smells like bullshit to me.

diggy
05-28-2009, 03:55 AM
Do you take what's presented here to be fact?

Part of what's presented here is claiming that human have been here on earth in the neighborhood of atleast 200 million years ago.

smells like bullshit to me.


I do not agree with all of what is said. I do agree that there were people of African ancestry here before Europeans.

Visionz
05-28-2009, 05:00 AM
I do not agree with all of what is said. I do agree that there were people of African ancestry here before Europeans.
which set? the vikings got here way before columbus.

but overall this video was trying to make the arguement that africans where here before the natives.

I stopped watching after she made the comment of people being on north america when it split from the rest of pangea. when something so outlandish is presented as fact then it causes me to distrust everything contained within.

What evidence do they have that the mound-builders where from africa? Couldn't it just as easily have been the ancestors of native indians?

Black Man
05-28-2009, 10:51 AM
How did they even get there though? Humans werent around during pangea.

How do you know this? Do you know when "humans" appeared on this planet?

Black Man
05-28-2009, 10:57 AM
Do you take what's presented here to be fact?

Part of what's presented here is claiming that human have been here on earth in the neighborhood of atleast 200 million years ago.

smells like bullshit to me.

All you're doing is making a claim also.

Black Man
05-28-2009, 11:01 AM
I do not agree with all of what is said. I do agree that there were people of African ancestry here before Europeans.

How were there people of African ancestry "here" (in the americas) when there was no Africa?

Black Man
05-28-2009, 11:13 AM
which set? the vikings got here way before columbus.

but overall this video was trying to make the arguement that africans where here before the natives.

NATIVES? NATIVE OF WHAT? THE BLACKMAN IS NATIVE TO THE ENTIRE PLANET, NOT JUST ONE PART. WHO GAVE THOSE PEOPLE THE NAME NATIVES? IS THAT WHAT THEY CALLED THEMSELVES? THE SAME GOES WITH AFRICANS....AS IF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON THAT CONTINENT LIVE THE SAME WAY OF LIFE. YOU MAKE A DISTINCTION WHEN IT COMES TO 'WHITES' BUT WHEN IT COMES TO NON-WHITES IT'S GENERAL BULLSHIT TERMS THAT ONLY CAUSES MORE CONFUSION.

I stopped watching after she made the comment of people being on north america when it split from the rest of pangea. when something so outlandish is presented as fact then it causes me to distrust everything contained within.

SOME OF THE WORLDS GREATEST HISTORIANS WOULD AGREE....USUALLY IT'S THOSE EUROPEANS, THE ONES WITH THE POWER TO DIRECT AND WRITE HISTORY THAT CHANGE AND DISTORT IT FOR THEIR OWN PUPROSES.

What evidence do they have that the mound-builders where from africa? Couldn't it just as easily have been the ancestors of native indians?

Details....

Some people simply don't want to admit who the foundation is....who set foot on every square inch of this planet and then chose the best part for himself then settled there. Some people simply don't want the truth to be known because it's so destructive to their system.

I'm wondering are they still manufacturing fake fossils to show that whites were here longer than they actually were?

Still trying to say aliens built the pyramids.

How many are still saying "white" skin came about because of the climate?

Eventually, the colored man will catch up to what's already known to the Original Man....that's why recently it's been revealed from the "western" scientific community that white skin did not come about because of a climate change but who's counting all the errors that's being made on purpose.

It's one thing to be wrong, it's another thing not to correct your error when you know it's wrong and that's what historians been doing for the longest.

It's bullshit when it's our history being told....but it's the ultimate truth when it's our history being erased.

Black Man
05-28-2009, 11:18 AM
The Olmec were NOT the 1st one's on the part of the planet known as the Americas, although they came before the people who are called native americans....the so-called native americas were the LAST group of people to migrate to this part of the planet called the Americas.

I've noticed when a non-white person speaks on things like this, it smells like bullshit.

It's a good thing though because it was a white man who discovered this history, however, he was excluded from the social equality of the other white historians because they didn't want to hear the truth, I mean they had other stories to write.

Black Man
05-28-2009, 11:20 AM
I'll post some info on this subject later....

diggy
05-28-2009, 01:39 PM
which set? the vikings got here way before columbus.

but overall this video was trying to make the arguement that africans where here before the natives.

I stopped watching after she made the comment of people being on north america when it split from the rest of pangea. when something so outlandish is presented as fact then it causes me to distrust everything contained within.

What evidence do they have that the mound-builders where from africa? Couldn't it just as easily have been the ancestors of native indians?

I did not make the vid so I cannot go into who the mound-builders were. My point of making this post is to let it known that there are traces of 'African Ancestry' here in the Americas before the Europeans came.



How were there people of African ancestry "here" (in the americas) when there was no Africa?

What???

gengoro
05-31-2009, 11:32 AM
How do you know this? Do you know when "humans" appeared on this planet?

Homo sapiens are only over 200,000 years old. Pangea was long broken up by time we got here.

Tage
05-31-2009, 12:04 PM
^WRONG!... i found all the facts you need to know about life and creationism from a dusty little book in the library... it was called "The Bible".....

another name for "The Bible" is "the Gospel".... so we all know it must be true.

V4D3R
05-31-2009, 05:52 PM
I'll post some info on this subject later....

Peace God, and I will drop the science on how could there be Africans here when there was no Africa.

If the whole Planet was one big slab of land with only high melanin people, that scientists call Pangea, how could there be Africans with no Africa, America, Asia, and Europe?

Blackman - who were the people here before the Olmecs?

Who wrote - researched this info? Who digged the archeological sites? What museum or university has this info?

How can the Native Americans be the last people to migrate to the Americas when Europeans came after them? and the countless other people that came after that?

Where is this movie do they claim humans have been around for 200 million years?

What do you know about the texts we once grazed on you and eye maybe 2 years ago - i need to look it up...cant find it...we built on ancient civilisations in there.

Shadowthrone
06-02-2009, 12:37 PM
Its been proven that humans can cross oceans in small boats

Egypt and Atlantis (for lack of a better word) had ties. Seaworthy boats have been found buried in Egypt. History also doesn't teach us that Egypt is probably a lot older than often stated. Think about the great flood that caused the sea level to rise significantly which destroyed many civilisations including the last remnant of atlantis, around 10000 bc iirc. Also destroying a lot of evidence. Some believe the native americans are the survivors of atlantis.

There is enough evidence to suggest that humans sailed the oceans long before what we were taught. Check out Shirly andrews books if you're interested in that stuff.

Ghost In The 'Lac
06-02-2009, 01:44 PM
That woman was saying humans were around over 250 million years ago.

The oldest fossil skeleton found of a modern human is 200,000 years ago, in Ethiopia.

Now im not saying thats when humans first evolved, but if there were humans around for that many millions of years before, you would think they wouldve found fossilised evidence or bones, like they found for Dinosaurs.

Black Man
06-03-2009, 12:43 PM
Peace God, and I will drop the science on how could there be Africans here when there was no Africa.

PEOPLE NEED TO STUDY THE SCIENCE OF GEOGRAPHY. IN THIS DAY AND TIME, AFRICA EITHER STARTS OR ENDS AT THE SUEZ CANAL DEPENDING ON HOW YOU LOOK AT IT. THE SUEZ CANAL IS A MAN(KIND)-MADE CANAL THAT BRINGS ABOUT A MAN(KIND)-MADE SEPERATION.

SOME PEOPLE CAN ONLY SEE THIS STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, THEY DON'T RECOGNIZE THE OTHER STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT THAT GOT US AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN DEVELOPMENT.

If the whole Planet was one big slab of land with only high melanin people, that scientists call Pangea, how could there be Africans with no Africa, America, Asia, and Europe?

Blackman - who were the people here before the Olmecs?

THE OLMECS WERE ORIGINAL PEOPLE JUST LIKE THE PEOPLE WE CALL INDIANS OR NATIVE AMERICANS. THEY'RE ALL ORIGINAL PEOPLE. IT'S THE COLORED MAN (10%) WHO GIVES DIFFERENT NAMES TO THE SAME PEOPLE CAUSING THE MASSES OF PEOPLE (85%) TO BELIEVE IN THE LIE THAT THESE PEOPLE, ORIGINAL PEOPLE ARE ALL DIFFERENT.

WHEN I SAY THERE WAS A GROUP OF PEOPLE BEFORE THE OLMECS, THEY'RE STILL ORIGINAL PEOPLE HOWEVER THEY MIGRATED TO THIS PART OF THE LAND BEFORE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NAMED OLMECS.

THERE'S BEEN MORE THAN ONE MIGRATION FROM THE EAST TO THE WEST.

MIGRATION, NOT EXPLORATION. PEOPLE CAN EXPLORE AND DISCOVER, BUT NOT SETTLE ON WHAT THEY DISCOVERED.

Who wrote - researched this info? Who digged the archeological sites? What museum or university has this info?

How can the Native Americans be the last people to migrate to the Americas when Europeans came after them? and the countless other people that came after that?

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE, NOT THE COLORED PEOPLE. OF COURSE, COLORED PEOPLE ARE THE LAST TO DISCOVER ANYPLACE ON THE EARTH.

Where is this movie do they claim humans have been around for 200 million years?

MOVIE???

What do you know about the texts we once grazed on you and eye maybe 2 years ago - i need to look it up...cant find it...we built on ancient civilisations in there.

The First Americans, Legand Clegg complains that, while the New School of revisionist historiography has focused much attention on Black contact with the Americas in the pre-Columbian period beginning in approximately the first millennium B.C., hardly anyone has yet focused on the presence of Black people in prehistoric America, ie c. 40,000 to 6,000 B.C.

More to come....

Kemeticly Doubs
06-12-2009, 02:12 AM
Check out, "they came before culumbus" book, its intresting...but this whole discussion is interesting...i know a lil about the olmecs...but i aint neva did no knowledge on no washitaw but i thought adam and eve somehow was the first on earth, but i dont know about kno people on no pangea....whats up wit dat??

diggy
06-12-2009, 02:26 AM
First I heard of the pangea/human thing too.

I don't know though.

I just posted it cuz it stated that originals were here way before the white man.

Face of the Golden Falcon
06-12-2009, 03:35 AM
...anyone heard of the "Laetoli Footprints"?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/11042376/-A-Forbidden-Archeology-A5-The-Hidden-History-of-the-Human-Race-

It's not proof indisputable, and it's not 200 million years ago but it certainly raises some questions.

SHEM HETEP