Black Spirituality Religion : the ancient peoples

Discussion in 'Black Spirituality / Religion - General Discussion' started by ANUK_AUSAR, Aug 31, 2006.

  1. ANUK_AUSAR

    ANUK_AUSAR Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Hetep

    Because of your "multifariousness" I have decided to extract your arguments from a post that, I believe, summarily states your many, many gripes with what has been suggested to you by the Afrocentrists on this board. Because of this, I will be showcasing my arguments in this thread; being a rather busy person, I don't have the time to wade through your side-arguments with other members of the board, and I think our discussion would greatly benefit from a little localization.

    "As I said, you are the one that started slinging “Diop” around in the conversation."

    Right, but you introduced this as evidence of my racial hang-ups. I never did mention the ethnicity of Diop, nor of his sources; and as I recall, it was your person who first made the race of one's source an issue when, ridiculously, you consolidated one of my sources, Pierre Montet, into a massive French conspiracy to manufacture false Egyptian artifacts, with some impertinent web link of the type that you sloppily toss about in all of these threads.

    And as I said, Diop was unaware of the new DNA genome information that reveals the European could not have been humanly evolved enough before 2000BC. Thus those savage tribes you are referring to and Diop is referring to had to have been Africans.

    I really wish you would stop making these incredible claims. They disclose a serious lack of basic scientific education and a schism in your thinking.
    On the one hand, you've claimed that the Europeans were not "sufficiently evolved enough" to have formed into savage tribes. You have not given us your basic idea of a tribal or civilized life, and then the elements essential for this which you claim the Europeans to have lacked.

    Then, you have so ridiculously claimed that the Europeans are, in fact, not white at all, but that the original Caucasians (re: white) were Black people, thus confusing the Yamnaya and the Tripolye peoples, and also showing that you shift priority according to available argumentative exits, such as your nonsensical gripes with titles such as "Eurasian".

    This series of thoughts is logically illegitimate for the following reason:

    Without a knowledge of what, exactly, is a European, and without a knowledge of the goings-on of the different races of Europe at the times in question; further, without a knowledge of *when exactly*, according to your hypothesis, the white man developed the capacities for speech, warfare etc., we are teetering upon your further readings, and are left with your "guesses" to throw at the established theories of Afrocentricity, which you have misapprehended as a monolithic and dogmatic institition.

    What we do have, thanks to the Two Cradle Hypothesis of Diop, are some simple indices for the origination of a given people:

    1. Are they basically sedentary?
    2. Are they pre-eminently agricultural?
    3. If they are nomadic, is this culturally reinforced, or is it a matter of environmental circumstance which forces their exodus?

    A good way to gauge this qualifier, which has its historical examples, is with the last question:

    4. Once settled into an amenable region, do they retain the practices which append nomadism (i.e. patriarchy, cremation, individualism as opposed to communalism, etc.?), such as is the case with the Greeks, the Romans, the Indo-Aryans?

    Though certain variables do exist from case to case with, for example, the Libyan people, Diop has made an outstanding first faithful leap into the delineation of what characteristics in cultural anomalies (like those of the Libyans in Africa, the Byzantines in Asia, the Semites etc.) fall into which category of humanity: the Northern (Eurasian) Cradle of humanity, or the Southern (Ethiopic) Cradle. This answers your following question:

    So are you saying because these tribes were savage acting that they could not have been African?,

    because I have not rested my assertion of the ethnicity of the Libyan people on so nebulous a contract as "savagery". In fact, I've advanced nothing original in presenting Diop's ideas on the peopling of Africa as representing a degradation of the megalith of Nilotic culture from which they originate. This may also be averred from Albert Churchward's masterful "Signs and Symbols of Primordial Man" in which are identified various Nilotic customs in vogue amongst isolated Austroloid and Chinese populations, showing the Nile Valley as the trajectory point for most pre-historic civilizations.

    As to your web link:

    http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/teraneter.html

    I find a tremendous irony in your repose upon the opinions of one white scholar on the subject discussed in the link above, as it is this same scholar (Petrie) who has tried to assert an Asiatic origin for Kamitic civilization. We find his name entrenched in a long and unfortunate series of citations of Egyptologists who share his opinion here:

    "Sir Flinders Petrie, whose status in Egyptology is on a par with that of Breasted, was similarly impressed with the extent of Semitic influence and was convinced of the fundamental Asian origin of Egyptian civilization."-

    http://www.hebrewhistory.info/factpapers/fp019-3_africa.htm

    Neither can we be impressed by the website who sponsors the hypotheses of this canon, a Hebrew propoganda site that, in this essay, seeks to make the Semites the curator-priests of civilization to the African people of the Nile Valley.

    So, Petrie's assignment of the Anu to the Asiatic races on either side of them (the Aamu) is, understandably, incumbent upon an intellectual environment which must seek to posit any African achievement into the furry palms of Semitic nomads, whose relationship to the Eurasian is more firmly enmeshed than that between the Eurasian and the African, among whom their ilk was esteemed a non-factor in the matters of civilization, as we have seen from the quotes by Champollion out of the Valley of Kings documents.

    Music Producer, don't you find any logical incongruity in allowing a scholar such as WM Flinders Petrie an audience, having realized that there may be to this some benefit for your idea of the Dogon people being the Aamu or Libyan race, yet ignoring when I earlier cited the exact same source as evidence for the proto-dynastic presence of the Asiatic (i.e. the white man) in the Delta, So that the Asiatic is there when he is Black Dogon but not when he is white?

    And, with all this, the Anu are not the same as the Aamu, nor is the Egyptian civilization an outgrowth of a non-existent parent race in Asia.

    “Set” is a corruption of “Seth”.
    “Amun” is a corruption of “Amma”, the Supreme Being of the Dogon.


    Following the line of logic that couples these two statements, the name "Set" would have to also have its antecedent in the Dogon language, but in fact, the name of the devil in that language is "Yurugu".

    Further, why is "Set" a corruption of "Seth", and not the other way around? Is it just because you have supposed it to be so, or have you somehow proven that the specific Semitic languages in which the name "Seth" occurs actually do pre-date the pre-dynastic use of the name Set?

    Remember, this would have to make that non-existent "Set devil" of the Dogon into "Seth", even.

    The Dogon have an oral history of being the first to inhabit Egypt and then they spread to Libya. This oral history is in harmony with the expansion of the Ethiopian Empire that existed before Egypt was established as such.

    You have a horrible habit of making statements of "fact" without posting supporting references. Isn't there something wrong with the discontinuity in the expulsion of the Hyksos (18th Dynasty, c.1550-BC.) and the first evidences of a primitive Garamantian civilization in Libya circa 500 B.C., more than a thousand years later? In fact, the further back one goes in the archaeological record of the Sahara, the less sophisticated do the Garamanteans become, as is to be expected of a civilization that develops over time.

    Clyde Ahmad Winters, whose Proto-Saharan postulates present the nearest affinities to your own speculations, dares not make the Garamantean into a vicissitude of the Hyksos, but regards them as a natural growth from the primordial Saharan civilization of the region:

    "The classical Carians (Garamanteans) and Egyptians were very close. Having originated in the Fertile African Crescent (the Sahara before 7000 B.C.) they had similar gods and cultural traditions dating back to the Proto-Saharan period."-http://clyde.winters.tripod.com/chapter6.html

    The so-called "Fertile African Crescent" of Clyde Ahmad Winters, a hypothesis for African cultural unity which goes back into the Neolithic period in Kamit :

    http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Bay/7051/pro1.html

    Whether Winters has explained the gulf between the rapid process of civilization of the Egyptians and that of the Carians or Garamanteans, I don't know; but the Garamanteans themselves must be regarded, by any African scholar caring to make them an indigenous African race, as a continuation of trends typical of the Libyan region, and not as an exodus of the Egyptian people into that land. Herodotus has respected that those Egyptian customs present with contemporaneous Libyan populations, such as the atrocious Adyrmachidae, were borrowed from the Egyptians, so that the earliest first-hand account we have of the Libyan races shows them as sloppily appropriating the pristine fineries of Egyptian culture.

    There is one compelling feature of the society that you've focused on, the Garamanteans, which makes them a lean fit into the statement of Diop that this region was permeated by Asiatics by the 2nd millenium B.C. That is, their habit of hunting what are called the "Ethiopian troglodytes"; that is, Blacks who have been resigned to the sanctuary of the caves by a warlike race. This reminds one of the retreat of the Black Rishis into the forests of India during the tumultuous period of Indo-Aryan invasion into their dominions. "Head-hunting" is not a fixture of Dogon society, nor has it ever been, amongst the Anu (who were Southerners anyway) of either the Delta, or of the

    Now, none of the above may nearly approximate your arguments, because these seem to transform with every chapter you complete of a new book in your possession. Again, you have married the Akhenaten expulsion and the Hebrew exodus, and divorced this from its obvious historical parallel in the expulsion of the Hyksos, which fits ever neatly into the Biblical chronology for such an event as the Exodus. To this end, you have respected the Bible over the available archaeological evidence to the contrary of its records, giving a different reason for your irrational incredulity with each citation of a scholarly source. Now you've added the Dogon into your maddening hypothesis, without giving any falsifiable variables during their migration which would leave only their identity with the Garamantean people...who you have also not properly delineated, either.

    Furthermore, the relationship between the Dogon and the Nubian people of pre-history is not imperative to this discussion, because it services either of our arguments. It would better serve you to make conspicuous the migration dates for the Dogon people, beginning from Kamit, so that we could discern their actual identity with the Libyan Garamanteans.

    So, it's not possible to argue against your ideas in their present format. I suggest that, before you mount offenses against full-fledged anthropological theories such as can be found in Afrocentricity, that you finish studying your sources, and make assiduous notes of how your own hypotheses might militate against the claims of these same sources given their own context, as is the case with the white Anunians of WM Flinders Petrie, whose ideological ilk Alexandre Moret and James Henry Breasted, would have agreed with much of what you've said about the Anu/Aamu, except that they knew that the consequence of making the Anu into the Aamu would have made the Anunians an Asiatic, rather than an Ethiopian, people, because the Aamu were always classically depicted as yellow to white; this is certainly not the unfirom coloring of the Dogon, now or ever, and this idiosyncracy was most certainly the impetus for Petrie's and others' slavish dedication to identifying the Anu with the Aamu.

    We will now rightly recall Diop's acknowledgement of the influx of Saharan Blacks into Kamit (during the desertification of their homeland) as a pre-historic boon to an already extant population of Blacks who travelled up the Nile, proving that, as he did not deem the white races in proto-dynastic Kamit to have contributed anything worthwhile to Delta civilization (see Chapter IV of The African Origin of Civilization: Myth or Reality, by Diop), he was yet aware of indigenous African presence in that Western region from the most remote period. He even acknowledges them openly in another book as one of the sources of the modern Central African people, who displaced the Khoi-Khoi in their migration:

    "One has...been led to suppose that, after the drying up of the Sahara, which had been terminated by 7000 B.C., the primitive population must have migrated in part towards the valley of the Nile, where they met other groups coming probably from the Great Lakes. These people formed, for a long time, a sort of cluster along the valley; then because of over-population and invasion by others, they moved once again towards the heart of the continent, driving before them the Pygmies."-p. 66, The Cultural Unity of Black Africa, by Cheikh Anta Diop

    Because he had never anticipated the extent of the programmatic damage done to African people in seeking our origin outside of our own lands, even into regions such as Asia to the East and Libya to the West where the populations never had attained to the loftiness of Kamitic civilization, Cheikh Anta Diop did not at this early period need to specialize his language to include those theories that would transform the Aamu into the Blacks. In his time, and with most accredited scholars, the association of the Aamu with the Anu is almost always a rendering of the Anu as a white race of people. This is because, in order to make the Anu into the Aamu, one *must* assume that the Anu who were without doubt the progenitors of Kamitic civilization, were centralized in the Delta, in Lower Egypt; to explain the phenomenon of Kamitic civilization by means of Pu-Anit would have taken these scholars too far into the realm of pre-Amharic Ethiopia, uncontestably Black and totemic.

    Because you're not conversant with these matters, but have hoisted upon your shoulders the responsibility of eviscerating over 58 years of Afrocentric research with layman's revistations of already-uncovered artifacts, and assigning to these new, remarkable and untestable meanings, you've afforded your own humiliation. How unfortunate, that you, not knowing the niceties of these dicussions, have plunged headfirst into the same type of ridiculous argument that, perhaps 200 years from now, will seek to make for a mulatto race of Americans, by then contented with their socio-economic disposition, a mixed-breed Europe that colonized the mixed-breed Indians' land in America, to assuage their identification with the barbarous people that afforded them their contemporary luxuries.

    Hetep.
     
  2. Destee

    Destee destee.com STAFF

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2001
    Messages:
    34,787
    Likes Received:
    8,982
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    betwixt and between
    Ratings:
    +9,680
    ANUK_AUSAR ... Peace and Blessings.

    Putting a Member's Name in the title makes the discussion appear personal, as though the Member is the topic, and this is not allowed.

    Please change the title of this thread to something other than "Music Producer."

    This will allow those who want to read and post to it aware that it's not really about him, but rather the content within.

    Thanks a Bunch.

    :heart:

    Destee
     
  3. Music Producer

    Music Producer Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,810
    Likes Received:
    94
    Ratings:
    +94
    Anuk

    All you did was wrote a lot of gibberish and wording to avoid my main evidence about how recent DNA genome analyses proves the Caucasian was the last race of people to enter the earth which means they could not have been the Hyksos.

    So lets see how much more facts you are willing to ignore.

    You evidently will not recognize how much technology would be required to build a War Chariot. I guess you would have me except the idea of a Eurasian Cave Men ridding a War Chariot? That would be the equivalency of a monkey building and flying an airplane. LOL

    Let’s look at some basic technology required to build a War Chariot:
    Training and corralling horses.
    Agriculture and farming, because horses eat a lot.
    Metal working and forging of steel.
    Metal working riveting technology, which is a highly advanced works.
    Engineering a structure that is held together with wood and metal bands or iron bolts.
    High end leather work for gloves and strapping.

    You would actually have me to believe all of this technology came from the Caucasian to the Africans of Egypt through the Hyksos?

    You are playing write into the hands of the white man of making Africans believe all of the ancient cultural advancements came from Caucasians to African nations.

    The TRUTH of the matter is none of this type of technology can be found in antiquities dating back to the Hyksos as coming from Europe around 1800BC. Thus the Hyksos had to have come from Africa because Africa is the only place that this type of technology was being used before 1800BC.

    So before we go any further so as to not clutter this thread with meaningless words and personal attacks I would like for you to substantiate your claim that the Hyksos were Caucasians.

    This can be done by revealing antiquities of ancient European technology required to build a War Chariot and settlements that predates 1800BC.

    Once you have shown these antiquities then we can move on in the subject.
     
  4. ANUK_AUSAR

    ANUK_AUSAR Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Destee...

    Peace & Blessings,

    I definitely would like to respect the boundaries of your board. If you can show me how to change the title of this thread, I would gladly do so. Tua-U (thank you).

    Peace.
     
  5. ANUK_AUSAR

    ANUK_AUSAR Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Hetep

    All you did was wrote a lot of gibberish and wording to avoid my main evidence about how recent DNA genome analyses proves the Caucasian was the last race of people to enter the earth which means they could not have been the Hyksos.

    It's unfortunate that you see it that way.

    So lets see how much more facts you are willing to ignore.

    Brother, I'm trying to spare you further embarrassment. Learn the proper use of words. Your sentence should have read "see how *many* more facts".

    You evidently will not recognize how much technology would be required to build a War Chariot. I guess you would have me except the idea of a Eurasian Cave Men ridding a War Chariot? That would be the equivalency of a monkey building and flying an airplane. LOL

    *Equivalency* does not convey the idea you were trying to express.

    You are looking for the adjective "equivalent".

    It's so disheartening when people pretend to eloquence.

    Now, maybe you can reiterate this "scientific DNA evidence" which, as I've already told you, is not going to tell you anything, AT ALL, about the development of white peoples' language from the time period in question.

    I've already addressed all of this in my thread-starter.

    Let’s look at some basic technology required to build a War Chariot:
    Training and corralling horses.
    Agriculture and farming, because horses eat a lot.
    Metal working and forging of steel.
    Metal working riveting technology, which is a highly advanced works.
    Engineering a structure that is held together with wood and metal bands or iron bolts.
    High end leather work for gloves and strapping.

    You would actually have me to believe all of this technology came from the Caucasian to the Africans of Egypt through the Hyksos?


    Well now, let's look at the history of the chariot, shall we?

    "The earliest fully developed chariots known are from the chariot burials of the Andronovo (Timber-Grave) sites of the Sintashta-Petrovka culture in modern Russia and Kazakhstan from around 2000 BC. This culture is at least partially derived from the earlier Yamna culture. It built heavily fortified settlements, engaged in bronze metallurgy on a scale hitherto unprecedented and practiced complex burial rituals reminiscent of Aryan rituals known from the Rigveda. The Sintashta-Petrovka chariot burials yield spoke-wheeled chariots. The Andronovo culture over the next few centuries spreads across the steppes from the Urals to the Tien Shan, likely corresponding to early Indo-Iranian cultures which eventually spread to Iran and India in the course of the 2nd millennium BC."-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot

    Kinda eviscerates your whole rant about Europe not possessing the technology to accomplish the feats in question, huh?

    Now, when the author refers to the Yamna culture, he/she is referring to none other than the Yamnaya culture, who are the demonstratable link between the Indo-Iranians in the Russian steppes and in India:

    By 4000 B.C., three mixed-farming (dairy) cultures were in competition in East Central Europe; these were

    .Tripolye (and Cucuteni), a branch of the Danubian Linear-Ware farmers who, however, did not practice cereal farming, but rather had an economy based on orchards, cows, sheep, and pigs.

    -Sredny Stog (and Kemi-Oba), branches of the Kurgan breeders whose economy featured horses, cows, goats, barley, and animal byproducts like leather.

    -TRB/Funnel Beaker, believed to be a branch of the Erteboelle Hunters, who began to build primitive villages and adopt some of the economic ideas of their neighbors, including barley and dairy farming...

    ...Although all three of these groups---Tripolye, Sredny Stog, and Funnel Beaker--- could be described as "early dairy farmers;" in fact the cultures were quite distinct: Tripolye was an organized village society with egalitarian matriarchal customs; Sredny Stog was a semi-nomadic patriarchal society which stressed individualism; the haphazard lifestyle of Funnel Beaker villagers betrays their recent development from unsettled foragers.

    (Cereal farming stresses patience, while stockbreeding requires physical strength-- this may explain why domesticating large animals changes a matriarchal society to patriarchal. Furthermore, the contrast between land-fixed self-growing crops and mobile animals needing to be tended, may help predict whether ancient economies will be based on communal or individual property rights.)
    [/SIZE]
    (freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~jamesdow/Tech/lmindoe.htm)

    The words in bold are of special import, because these are precisely the issues that have concerned the evolution of African sedentary matriarchy and European nomadic patriarchy. The Tripolye, though modified by their interaction with the Sredny Stog peoples, are regarded as the descendants of the Linear Ware people, whose cereal farming preoccupation is readily identifiable as a vicissitude of the earliest Aurignacian period of the Upper Paleolithic.

    We will remember that the Aurignacians were concurrent with the Grimaldis, and that, if the two were not identical races, that they together represent a contemporaneous diffusion of ancient African culture throughout ancient Europe:

    http://www.arthistory.sbc.edu/imageswomen/prehistlinks.html

    You are playing write into the hands of the white man of making Africans believe all of the ancient cultural advancements came from Caucasians to African nations.

    Not at all. I've attributed no African accomplishment of any value to the Caucasians (which for you should not be a problem anyway; aren't the Caucasians Black Colchians?).

    The technological, educational and philosophical advancements of the African races from the most remote periods of writing humiliate the earliest attempts of Europeans who, though a savage people at the time, I will not deny their military acumen (which Africans also surpassed for the majority of the historical period).

    The TRUTH of the matter is none of this type of technology can be found in antiquities dating back to the Hyksos as coming from Europe around 1800BC.

    You are absolutely wrong. Europe, as I've proven with an earlier link, possessed the chariot and other weapons that bespeak military statehood (policies which were reinforced upon their conquest of African people to the South), from as early as 2000 B.C.

    Now, you can either write these off solely as the achievements of Black people, by pretending these whites practiced anything resembling an African mode of society, or you can concede that such white people as the Scythians of the Ukraine and the other "Skudats" of Asia, the whites amongst the Huns, the Assyrians of Akkad, the Amorites and Kassites, etc. at least possessed enough sense to plunder those lands who had surpassed them in every respect except in barbarism; and that, in reducing those nations by this one asset, they gradually bleached the populations into the modern Brown races of the Near and Middle East.

    What you can *no longer* do, though, is to localize the chariot phenomenon to the Libyan region, which is not shown to possess this technology until much, much later than 2000 B.C.

    So before we go any further so as to not clutter this thread with meaningless words and personal attacks I would like for you to substantiate your claim that the Hyksos were Caucasians.

    My words are not meaningless in the slightest sense. If you can find a meaningless word that I've used, then use this space at the present to showcase it.

    On the other hand, I can draw from a milieu of misspellings, grammatical errors and improper uses of very simple terms that you've littered all throughout your posts, such as your awkward employ of the term "antiquities", which, I must admit, is a step-up from the embarrassing "antiquates" that you were prone to using before my correction.

    If you're going to strike my arm, make sure you don't expose your gut.

    Hetep Seb Aungkh
     
  6. river

    river Watch Her Flow MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,458
    Likes Received:
    1,282
    Gender:
    Female
    Occupation:
    Author
    Location:
    Where the Niger meets the Nile
    Ratings:
    +1,290
    Hotep,

    At the bottom of your post beside the Reply button is an Edit button (visible only to the author of a post). Click it then on the Edit page click the Advanced button and a page will come up where you can change the title.
     
  7. Music Producer

    Music Producer Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,810
    Likes Received:
    94
    Ratings:
    +94
    Anuk:

    Do you know the meaning of European antiquates?

    To show you an example of Egyptian antiquates look at some of these photos….
    http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&sa=N&resnum=0&q=Egyptian antiquities&tab=wi

    An antiquity is an actual physical object that can be dated to the period it belonged to. An antiquity is NOT an article that has no photographs of the ancient material or object supporting its claim. A real antiquity will be setting in a museum as to where one can go see it, study it and read for themselves as to its inscriptions.

    Until you bring this fourth you have not proven nothing of showing the required technology and civilization to build a War Chariot from European antiquates predating 1800BC.
     
  8. jamesfrmphilly

    jamesfrmphilly going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    32,000
    Likes Received:
    11,478
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    retired computer geek
    Location:
    north philly ghetto
    Ratings:
    +13,733
    i changed it for you
     
  9. Destee

    Destee destee.com STAFF

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2001
    Messages:
    34,787
    Likes Received:
    8,982
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    betwixt and between
    Ratings:
    +9,680
    Brother ANUK_AUSAR ... to change the title of a thread, click on the EDIT button in the first post of the thread. That will take you to a "quick edit" screen, from there you'll see a button on the bottom right of that screen that says "GO ADVANCED" ... click it ... and you'll see where you can edit all the options, including the title.

    I didn't know what you might want the title to be, other than what you gave it, so i didn't change it for you. If you want to change it still, you are surely welcome to.

    Thanks for being willing to abide by the rules, and if you have any more questions, i'm right here.

    Much Love and Peace.

    :heart:

    Destee
     
  10. ANUK_AUSAR

    ANUK_AUSAR Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1
    Producer...

    You've got a lot of nerve. After all your quotations from Herodotus, and all your ridiculous connections between the Libyans and the Dogons, you are so afraid of the fact that there might *actually* be evidence of Europeans' possession of chariot technology that you would actually decry my lack of "pictures" of the chariots in question?

    "75 Selection of chariot scenes from the Andronovo Culture and related cultures from central Asia, Kazakstan, Pamir and northwestern India."

    http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521843634&ss=fro

    There are pictures of the chariots in question in that book.

    "The earliest known examples (of the spoked wheel) are in the context of the Andronovo culture, dating to ca 2000 BC (see chariot). Shortly later, horse cultures of the Caucasus region were given a tremendous politico-military boost by their state-of-the-art horse-drawn spoked-wheel war chariots which enabled them to range far and wide against suddenly enfeebled opposition for the greater part of three centuries, most notably deep into the Greek peninsula where they joined with the existing Mediterranean peoples to give rise, eventually, to classical Greece after the breaking of Minoan dominance and consolidations led by pre-classical Sparta and Athens."-http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_How_Things_Work/Wheel

    http://www.happydogsclup.com/sdmc_Sintashta-Petrovka

    There are countless other websites that speak about the Sintashta-Petrovka culture, and how the Andronovos possessed chariots which were buried in kurgans (burial mounds) along with their riders.

    Even websites that contest the finds of Gnady Zdanovich (head of the expeditions that have pieced together the history of the Shintashta-Petrovka culture) can only question the probability of their chariot's actual engineering, matters of a technical nature for which no further source is provided:

    http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/chariot.html

    We should remember that this is an Indocentric website.

    But, it would take YOU to pretend that even the enemies of the theory don't know what they're talking about, and that these chariots do not exist, because you've never personally seen them before, as if, when presented with the actual museum or university, you're going to tear yourself away from propagandizing on the computer long enough to make the trip to go see them.

    Only YOU, Music Producer, not an expert or a trained person to anyone's knowledge here, but, ONLY YOU, who have relied on ancient testimonies of Herodotus to draw the connective joint between the Dogons and the Garamanteans, without ever having showed us ONE SINGLE DOGON CHARIOT (or, a Garamantean chariot, for that matter);

    ONLY YOU, who has relied primarily on guesswork for everything you've said here about the races of antiquity;

    ONLY YOU, who cannot decide if God is an amphibian monster from the Sirius Star System, or if Amma is a corruption of Nummo, or if we should follow the God of the Old Testament;

    NO, it is ONLY YOU that we should trust. NOT established authorities on the subject, not people well-versed with Afrocentric theory, not African priests such as Ra Un Nefer Amen, not even people like Malachi York who have traversed your path before you, with much more originality and congruity of thought. JUST YOU, a man that none of us knows, who dangles misconstructions of vague or non-existent data before us as incentive to eschew the God of our Ancestors and join the merry worshippers of the Sirius B daemon.

    Right. I'll take my chances with the tried and true practices of my ancestors, as opposed to a man who can't even write right :) (and yes, that was a stab at your incorrect use of the homophone "write" in an earlier post).

    I think you might be too mummified for any light to enter through.

    Regardless,

    Hetep.
     
Loading...