Why the Olmecs did not stay in Ancient America. Blacks came to America before Columbus

[GLASNOST]

There are still many native tribes around in Mexico, Central and South America, and none of them look 'black', they look more like Polynesian and slightly Asian in some cases.

There are still many statues, etchings and carvings, around in Mexico, Central and South America, and none of them look 'black', they look more like Polynesian and slightly Asian in some cases.

 

[surada]

There are still many statues, etchings and carvings, around in Mexico, Central and South America, and none of them look 'black', they look more like Polynesian and slightly Asian in some cases.

Olmec Civilization

The role of the Olmec in Mesoamerican society is a matter of hot debate between archaeologists and anthropologists.

www.nationalgeographic.org

 

[Unkotare]

 

[GLASNOST]

..... take an honest look at the carvings, those are African faces.

U-huh. Sure. Here is Asuelo Pulaa (from Samoa) on the reality TV series "90 Day Fiance".

I rest my case.

 

[Mushroom]

The Zing He Fleet had dozens of ships some were 400+ feet long .

You mean Zheng He.

But remember, especially at that era the Chinese were not "explorers". They hugged the "known coast", and only traveled along the coastline of the Indian Ocean. Along Asia and Africa, and never traveling East into the Pacific. They never sailed to say Japan, or the Philippines, or up to Alaska. All of their voyages hugged the coastline, never losing sight of land.

It does not matter how big the ships were, they simply had no interest in real exploring. And after he died, they drew back into their shell and never really did it again.

 

[Mushroom]

There are still many native tribes around in Mexico, Central and South America, and none of them look 'black', they look more like Polynesians and slightly Asian in some cases.

Well, that is increasingly obvious when you look at the DNA.

Like all on the Americas, their ancestors came from Asia. And even from each other there are differences. Take somebody from 1400 Mexico, and place them next to somebody from 1400 New York. Differences, as each evolved differently over the thousands of years since they went their own ways.

I even joked when I lived on the outskirts of a Reservation in California that most in the local tribe also recognized I was of Indian descent. But also very different. Some things are obvious if you know what to look for "darker skin is a major one"), but the different facial structure shows I was still an "outsider". Western tribes tend to a more squat body and rounder face. While Eastern tribes tend towards a more taller and slender body, and a longer face.

We can see in each other we are not really "Anglo", but still "foreigners". One reason groups like the Lakota were considered to be outsiders when they entered the range of tribes that had lived in an area for over 2,000 years.

 

[Mushroom]

I am convinced it were African mariners who sailed to the Americas with enslaved European powder monkeys, some of whom "jumped ship" just as mutineers did some time later on Pitcairn but Columbus couldn't admit that the "New World" was already inhabited by white people so he suppressed the account in his captain's log.

You are aware that you are trying to mix events a huge distance form each other historically, right?

The Olmecs were well over 1,000 before Columbus. The most advanced European nations were making not much more advanced than the coracle. "Enslaved powder monkeys"? Holy hell, thanks for letting us know what a flaming racist you are. At the era those carvings were made, Rome was still the predominant nation in Europe.

Pitcairn Island? The Olmecs were in power in the First and Second Millennium BCE. The Bounty mutiny, that was getting close to 4,000 years later, in 1787. And you are really trying to link them together?

God save us from pseudo-science.

 

[DudleySmith]

Well, that is increasingly obvious when you look at the DNA.

Like all on the Americas, their ancestors came from Asia. And even from each other there are differences. Take somebody from 1400 Mexico, and place them next to somebody from 1400 New York. Differences, as each evolved differently over the thousands of years since they went their own ways.

I even joked when I lived on the outskirts of a Reservation in California that most in the local tribe also recognized I was of Indian descent. But also very different. Some things are obvious if you know what to look for "darker skin is a major one"), but the different facial structure shows I was still an "outsider". Western tribes tend to a more squat body and rounder face. While Eastern tribes tend towards a more taller and slender body, and a longer face.

We can see in each other we are not really "Anglo", but still "foreigners". One reason groups like the Lakota were considered to be outsiders when they entered the range of tribes that had lived in an area for over 2,000 years.

As for body types, a lot of tribesmen tend to look like Koreans, short and stocky, the further south and on the west coasts, not all but enough to be noticeable. Don't do much DNA stuff so don't know how that all matches up with them and Koreans.

 

[GLASNOST]

You are aware that you are trying to mix events a huge distance form each other historically, right?

No sense of humour, eh?

"Enslaved powder monkeys"? Holy hell, thanks for letting us know what a flaming racist you are.

You are an idiot who doesn't know what a "powder monkey" is. Plus ......

At Pitcairn Island? The Olmecs were in power in the First and Second Millennium BCE. The Bounty mutiny, that was getting close to 4,000 years later, in 1787. And you are really trying to link them together?

... you are also illiterate. What do 4,000 years have to do with my example of "mutiny"?

God save us from pseudo-science.

God save us from you.

 

[Mushroom]

No sense of humour, eh?

You are an idiot who doesn't know what a "powder monkey" is. Plus ......

I do have a sense of humor. But this is a scientific area, not a humor one.

And I am not an idiot, I know what a "powder monkey" is. However, are you also aware about the racist comments made for centuries that the Indians could not have built their civilizations themselves? So obviously had some "superior outsiders" come in and actually do it for them? The beliefs of many that the "13th tribe" of Israel came over and is really responsible is one of the most common ones.

... you are also illiterate. What do 4,000 years have to do with my example of "mutiny"?

God save us from you.

You are trying to take things carved thousands of years before Columbus, and then trying to create an example he was responsible for it.

Just go away, as you always do you twist things around, then scream that others are idiots. What, because we try to take what you say seriously? OK, fine. I will from now on take everything you write as nothing but a big joke, and that you mean nothing of it.

In other words, you are admitting you are juts a troll.

 

[GLASNOST]

I am not an idiot,

You are having difficulty proving it.

I know what a "powder monkey" is.

Then why do say I'm a racist for using the term?

However, are you also aware about the racist comments made for centuries that the Indians could not have built their civilizations themselves? So obviously had some "superior outsiders" come in and actually do it for them? The beliefs of many that the "13th tribe" of Israel came over and is really responsible is one of the most common ones.

It has nothing to do with "powder monkey". I thought you said you know what it means. I guess you don't.

You are trying to take things carved thousands of years before Columbus, and then trying to create an example he was responsible for it.

No, I am taking what I said two days ago (not thousands of years ago) ... my words that you don't understand but make it out to be something in your imagination.

Just go away, as you always do you twist things around, then scream that others are idiots.

You are a first-class nincompoop.

 

[Mushroom]

It has nothing to do with "powder monkey". I thought you said you know what it means. I guess you don't.

Here is your quote again, in case you completely forgot about it.

I am convinced it were African mariners who sailed to the Americas with enslaved European powder monkeys, some of whom "jumped ship" just as mutineers did some time later on Pitcairn but Columbus couldn't admit that the "New World" was already inhabited by white people so he suppressed the account in his captain's log.

The Olmecs and those carvings are a hell of a long time before Columbus.

There would have been no blacks on the ships with Columbus. You know, there was this little thing that was happening in Spain I guess you never heard of called the "Reconquesta". Maybe you need to actually lookin into that era of Spanish History.

I am calling you an idiot because as I said you are trying to mash together thousands of years of actual history into a small time frame. There was only one black person with Columbus, and that was Pedro Alonso Niño. He was a skilled navigator, and piloted the Santa Maria on the first expedition. He returned to Spain with him, and in 1499 went on his own voyage as Captain, exploring the modern Virgin Islands. He discovered salt mines and returned with a wealth in trade goods to Spain, where he died in 1505.

Slavery as you are talking about happened over a hundred years later. And it still does not explain the Olmecs.

 

[GLASNOST]

Here is your quote again, in case you completely forgot about it.



The Olmecs and those carvings are a hell of a long time before Columbus.

There would have been no blacks on the ships with Columbus. You know, there was this little thing that was happening in Spain I guess you never heard of called the "Reconquesta". Maybe you need to actually lookin into that era of Spanish History.

I am calling you an idiot because as I said you are trying to mash together thousands of years of actual history into a small time frame. There was only one black person with Columbus, and that was Pedro Alonso Niño. He was a skilled navigator, and piloted the Santa Maria on the first expedition. He returned to Spain with him, and in 1499 went on his own voyage as Captain, exploring the modern Virgin Islands. He discovered salt mines and returned with a wealth in trade goods to Spain, where he died in 1505.

Slavery as you are talking about happened over a hundred years later. And it still does not explain the Olmecs.

* What do “enslaved European powder monkeys” have to do with racism?

* I never said anything about “slavery” or black people.

* As far as the time line between Olmecs and Columbus well all you have to do is read my words …. the one you just quoted.

BOTTOM LINE: You are an idiot and an illiterate plus you are a liar becuse you don't know what a "powder monkey" is but you claim that you do.

 

[Mushroom]

* As far as the time line between Olmecs and Columbus well all you have to do is read my words …. the one you just quoted.

BOTTOM LINE: You are an idiot and an illiterate plus you are a liar becuse you don't know what a "powder monkey" is but you claim that you do.

I know what a "powder monkey" is. And you keep avoiding what I say to scream I am an idiot over and over again. Yet, ignoring the fact that like far too many, you seem to find it impossible to believe that Indians could do such things on their own, and obviously needed help to do it.

That it took blacks from Africa (none of which had any kind of blue water sailing capability) to come to the Americas to "teach the Indians" how to do such.

As I said, you are a racist and twisting history. Did I say a word about you being racist against blacks? In other words, you are a troll and hoping to "zing" me, which is what trolls do. You said it yourself, to you this is all in fun. But you miss that I have been taking offense and quite clearly said so about your stupid claims about that (and apparently all other works according to many) came not from the Indians themselves, but from outsiders.

 

[GLASNOST]

I know what a "powder monkey" is. And you keep avoiding what I say to scream I am an idiot over and over again. Yet, ignoring the fact that like far too many, you seem to find it impossible to believe that Indians could do such things on their own, and obviously needed help to do it.

That it took blacks from Africa (none of which had any kind of blue water sailing capability) to come to the Americas to "teach the Indians" how to do such.

As I said, you are a racist and twisting history. Did I say a word about you being racist against blacks? In other words, you are a troll and hoping to "zing" me, which is what trolls do. You said it yourself, to you this is all in fun. But you miss that I have been taking offense and quite clearly said so about your stupid claims about that (and apparently all other works according to many) came not from the Indians themselves, but from outsiders.

You speak like a racist, an idiot, a liar and a fool. In addition to all of that, you didn't understand anything I wrote which makes me wonder if you understand English or if you are completely illiterate as well. "Slavery"? "Racists"? "Indians"? "Trolls"? "Zingers"? It's only you who find it in anything I wrote , in other words, it's only in your fantasy.
Perhaps you had too much to drink or maybe you're smoking something other than tobacco .

 

[Mushroom]

You speak like a racist, an idiot, a liar and a fool. In addition to all of that, you didn't understand anything I wrote which makes me wonder if you understand English or if you are completely illiterate as well. "Slavery"? "Racists"? "Indians"? "Trolls"? "Zingers"? It's only you who find it in anything I wrote , in other words, it's only in your fantasy.
Perhaps you had too much to drink or maybe you're smoking something other than tobacco .

Once again, I was waiting to see if you could actually give any kind of proof to back up your claims. You know, the kind of thing that is generally expected in a forum area about history.

Yet once again, more attacks. I am bored with this, goodbye.

 

[GLASNOST]

Once again, I was waiting to see if you could actually give any kind of proof to back up your claims. You know, the kind of thing that is generally expected in a forum area about history.

Yet once again, more attacks. I am bored with this, goodbye.

Yes, you are an illiterate racist - sod off.