Synthesis of ideas: intelligent creatures shared the Earth

Messages
12
Likes
68
#1
I wrote this out quickly a little while back, just to have it down. I know it is not polished, but I just wanted to put the ideas out there and see what people thought. The forum I originally had intended this for was defunct when I went looking for it. I just came across this stolenhistory a couple of days ago. I have been looking through all the posts and I hope this will be alright. It does cross a lot of other stuff, but I didn't come across any other posts with the same angle as far as I could see.
===========================

So this is a hypothesis. Please contribute.

Hypothesis- in the relatively recent past there were other intelligent creatures sharing the Earth with human beings.

Argument-

So, I often have looked at charts of supposed human population growth since ancient times. You always will see the same chart- a steady slight increase for thousands of years. This is followed by a virtual 90 degree turn straight up, which explosive population growth we are still supposed to be in right now.

But if you look at the chart, it starts way back in about 1400. So what happened just then? Did we have some kind of major innovation just then? No. Some kind of new wonder crop? Did they discover penicillin? No.

But plainly something happened around then.

I recently realized why the population growth chart always looked a bit familiar.

It looks like a predator-prey population growth chart. You may have read that when predators decline, that prey populations will skyrocket. Then when predator populations recover, the prey population plummets. This leaves not enough food for the predators, and their own population declines. This allows the prey population to rebound, and it goes back and forth like that.

So I didn't necessarily think people were suffering depredation in the year 1300. So I wondered if maybe this chart might be showing the effects of inter-species competition, followed by a period when the competitors are suddenly removed.

So, as I was thinking of this, I was remembering reading that the Donbass region had been settled in the 17th century. The 17th century? It is right in the middle of everything. No one ever wanted to live there from the dawn of time until the 17th century? That doesn't make sense. But if the human population had been so low for so much of history, it makes more sense. There may not have been enough people to live there, even if they wanted to.

So back in all those centuries when the human population was so low, this supposedly is when people were knocking out these giant structures and public works projects, etc etc- pyramids, giant temples, whatever. But at the same time, they didn't even have enough people to fill up prime real estate all across Europe and Asia- let alone the rest of the world.

So, in the past I had read this book 1491
1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus - Wikipedia

It talks about the Europeans coming to America and all the Indians were wiped out by different European diseases, etc etc. The author attributes most of the decline in Western hemisphere population to disease from contact, rather than warfare with Europeans.

However, when I was thinking of it, here the Europeans came in 1492. You read of the Indians in Central and South America being wiped out by disease before the Europeans ever turn up, spread among the Indians by their own transportation systems. So these diseases are super contagious, run all through the whole continent of South America, all of Central America. But somehow the diseases didn't really get along up to North America in 1492, even with the Spanish tramping through Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, other areas down that way, even with explorers all up and down the eastern seaboard.

But then, when it is time for the Europeans to settle in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions, all of a sudden the Indians are being wiped out by disease again, having apparently withstood the spread of disease way back maybe 120 years earlier.

So at another time, I was thumbing through a local history book from Maine, and it mentioned that the woods were full of skeletons from Indians who dropped dead from disease conveniently just before the settlers started turning up.

I at another time was reading a book about Bigfoot by David Paulides, Tribal Bigfoot.
Tribal Bigfoot

There is literally one sentence in this book about a particular location. It refers to a conflict between the local Indians and the white people in I think as late as maybe the 1920s or something like that. This Indian tribe conveniently gets wiped out by some kind of plague so that they are out of the white people's hair.

Now how are the Indians being wiped out in 1920? They were exposed to European diseases probably by the early 1500s. The Spanish were all through there up until the 1800s. At the same time, the Russians were coming down into the same area from the 1700s. At the same time the English were exploring along through there. By the 1800s, the Americans are all through there until it becomes part of the USA. By the 1900s, California is well part of America. What in the world disease is wiping out a whole tribe in California at such a late date? Doesn't make sense.

Now in this 1491 book, and in many other places, people talk about how the Indians didn't have immunity to European diseases, etc etc. The 1491 book makes the argument that the Indians were uniquely vulnerable to European diseases because of the way their immune systems work. OK fine.

So at another time, I was reading a little monograph on the Guanches in the Canary Islands.
The White Indians of Nivaria

It is called The White Indians of Nivaria.

So it talks about how these Canary Islands off the coast of Africa were populated by Caucasian people. The islands were volcanic, which apparently means there will be no metal there. So these people were living in the Stone Age. They also were discovered by the Spanish.

Well, you may say, these guys weren't Indians with their crappy immune systems, so they won't be wiped out by Spanish diseases.

You will, however, be wrong if you think this, because the white Indians of Nivaria were equally wiped out by disease, just as the red Indians of America were.

Now I read this, and I said 'How the f many diseases did the Spanish have? How could they even have managed to stay alive in the boats long enough to get from one place to another to wipe everyone out by taking a dump in a canal or throwing up on a footpath, or whatever they were suppposed to have done.'

Now, on even yet another occasion, I was reading about supposedly some Roman artefacts discovered off the coast of Nova Scotia. Well, that many or may not be true. But everyone accepts that the Vikings came along to North America way back around the year 1,000. I also have read in the past that remains of European rats and sheep wool yarn have been discovered on islands in the Canadian Arctic, apparently from a time even longer ago than the Vikings. Alright, great.

But now, riddle me this, if the Europeans were in North America at least as far back at the year 1,000, why didn't all the Indians get wiped out at that time? Why didn't the Vikings just move in and find the woods full of Indian skeletons, the way settlers did later on?

Separately again, I came across references to a guy named Anatoly Fomenko over in Russia. He alleges that human history is basically all made up, and that we really can't even guess what our history could have been prior to about 1,000 years ago. He alleges that back at that time a thousand years ago, that there was essentially only one culture or civilization present, that kind of existed within a broader human population that was at a very low level of development. These civilized people kind of swanned around and did their thing, and savages kind of faded in and out of the world of civilization. So he alleges that people invented writing back then, and the idea of it spread all around, but people heard of it before they saw it in action, and some inventive people in different places had different takes on writing. Some of them wrote left to right, right to left, up to down, wrote with letters or pictures, etc etc

He also supposes that the progression from the invention of gunpowder to cannons and guns was much shorter than we are led to believe.

So anyway, he has all these notions about how things back then differ from what we are taught.

I actually don't think his ideas are quite right, but he does point out a lot of things that don't add up from history.

Not coming from the same background, but reaching similiar conclusions are this guy Miles W Mathis, who has all kind of articles about how this, that, and the other story from fairly recent times was actually fake. There is another guy in England, Chris Spivey, who puts out all these articles about news stories right now, today that he thinks are faked. So there may be this thread of faked history, fake news, fake stories, etc.

Following even another thread, there is a youtube channel called newearth. It is put on by a woman Silvia Ivanova from I think Bulgaria. She has a whole bunch of videos about, again, things that don't add up from history. She seems to have been maybe inspired by Fomenko, but doesn't follow his line.

I noticed in one video she was pointing out maps from the 1500s and 1600s of the Western hemisphere. She points out all the rivers of South America are mapped fairly accurately. The whole coast of South America is mapped, all of Central America, all of the eastern side of North America- but for some reason the northwest of North America is like 'terra incognita'. It is just kind of a doodle up in the corner of the map. She says, 'What was going on up here? They could sail the Straits of Magellan, but they can't find Vancouver?'

Again, it doesn't make sense.

So this woman makes this argument that there was a previous world-wide civilization. A new power grew up first in Europe and over several centuries went out to conquer this older civilization and wipe it out. She alleges that the last hold-outs of this older civilization existed in northeastern Asia and adjoining areas of northwestern North America.

A different youtuber, an Indian named Samuel Poe, has some videos where he talks about the 'Ojibway of Asia'. He says in his videos that the Ojibway lived both in western North America and northeastern Asia. He says that the Europeans were at war with the Ojibway. As time went by in this war, they managed to isolate the Ojibway in North America from the rest of their nation across the Bering Strait. Then they wore down the Indians until finally they were able to defeat them.

I said to myself, 'This is essentially the same story the other woman was theorizing, but from the other side.' It didn't appear these people knew each other. When I came across this guy's youtube channel, most of videos only had 40 or less views. So it seems unlikely that anyone was cribbing from him. Could be the other way around.

I kept the idea in the back of my head, and another time read an article about how the Indians have substantial genetic background from western Eurasia. From what I read, this would explain why even though the Indians supposedly came from Asia, they don't really look like people from Asia. They kind of come from another lost tribe that we don't really see elsewhere in the world. So that seems like it could be consistent with what Poe was saying, and also with what Ivanova was saying well.

So anyway, a lot of these 'there's something wrong with history people' people point out anomalous buildings and monuments and stuff. A lot of them appear to be for people bigger than human beings, and a lot appear to be intended for people smaller than human beings.

So this guy Lloyd Pie in a video was saying something about how there are three great apes- the gorilla, the chimp, and the orangutan. He points that in the fossil record there were three humanoid type groups, but now we just have people and we are rather unlike the rest of the primates. He attributes this to aliens or whatever. Doesn't really matter, but I just remembered that there is this possibility that there ought to be other kinds of humanoids hanging around besides ourselves.

Then, separately, of course, everyone knows all kinds of stories about fairies, brownies, whatever little people, and also stories about different kinds of giants. These stories are present all over the world it seems.

So I was thinking:

a. there maybe should be some other humanoids around, but we don't see any
b. we have possible evidence of other humanoids in the form of ruins that don't seem appropriate for the people we now see living all over the world

So, it seemed to me, what if in the fairly recent past there actually -were- other kinds of people living all around the world? It seems to me, this would account for why the human population didn't really grow that much for so long. The humans had their world, and the other people had their worlds, and the different groups didn't have too much interaction. But due to similar necessities of life, they interfered with each other's growth patterns, possibly keeping all of their populations fairly low.

Now, to go back to the population growth chart way up at the top of this, you see that sky-rocket take off.

What if this was due to the removal of competition? I am speculating that sometime in the lead-up to that sky-rocket that something happened to these other people out there. I am not an expert on this kind of thing, so I can't say what kind of lead time you would need to have before you would get a population explosion. But let's say it was 50 or a hundred years before that.

I am speculating that there was some kind of disease outbreak in these non-human populations, resulting in a radical decline in their numbers. Under 'natural' circumstances, the survivors would rebuild and pass on their partial immunity and the population would at some point rebound.

So, I am speculating that this 'natural' rebound didn't occur.

I am speculating that this outbreak probably was most severe either in Europe or the somewhere around the Middle East.

I speculate that some of the humans around at that time realized what was happening, and weaponized this disease. They used it to kill off all these non-human people.

Why would they do this?

If we take some of these ruins to actually be the ruins of non-human people, then we know they had a material culture. Therefore, they will have had some kind of wealth. The men who wiped them out would be able to take all of that wealth for themselves. These men would also now be able to expand into the areas that had been denied to them in the period of inter-species competition. So they would gain the wealth in land. This potential for expansion would also provide such men a wealth in the form of increased human population that they could hope to control. It seems like there would be a lot gain for certain individuals from a genocide like this.

However, we can suppose that not everyone would be onboard with this kind of thing. How would such men keep a lid on dissent? One way might be to start re-writing history- write these other people out of history.

'Whose castle is that?
- Mine.
Doesn't belong to the elf king?
- There is no elf king, so....... no.'

There also is this dynamic where people will wipe out another group, but then later they feel bad about it. If these men couldn't be sure that they had wiped out all the non-human people, they wouldn't want humans coming back in a hundred years feeling bad about killing everyone off, and trying to save them. If that happened, the humans might want to give back their stuff. That would be no good, of course.

So if the underlying speculation was true, it would provide a motive for the manipulation of history that we observe, but can't explain.

I was thinking at another time, that a lot of these stories about elves and things, the elves will do things to annoy people in out of the way places. They might let their horses out of the barn during the night, steal their food, you would only meet them at night or in very desolate and unpopulated areas.

These are all things that we see happening in the human world when one group loses a conflict with another group. The losers will run away. They will hide out. They may try to continue harrassing the winners, but now they are unable to operate openly or in a coordinated fashion, so they just cause random mayhem. The behavior of the elves or fairies now, to me, sounds a lot like the behavior of people who lost some kind of war or something.

Then, following the same line of thought, as time goes by, and the human population becomes denser and more extensive, the opportunity for isolated groups from the losing side to sustain themselves in organized communities will decline, learning will decline, trade will decline, maybe general levels of health. Who knows what happens when a whole people is forced into hiding? At some distance in time, they may even become isolated and in-bred and start to lose their ability even to survive at all, community or no.

This thought then reminded me of another line I had read in the Tribal Bigfoot. The author reports that some of the Indians had said that back in the old days the Bigfoots/Bigfeet had been accustomed to use fire, but they stopped using it after the arrival of the white man to avoid drawing attention to themselves. This makes me think that maybe the Bigfoot are the in-bred, isolated, lost all their culture descendants of some old-time race that used to have a bigger place in the world than it does now.

In the same way, stories of fairies from longer ago seem to talk about more fairies, with nicer houses, and just generally more going on. As time goes by it is less and less fairies, with apparently less and less going for them.

I once read a story about someone meeting a leprechaun in the 19th century and the leprechaun is lamenting that his people have declined so much in number from what they used to be.

So, to go back to the Guanches and the Indians. How did the Spanish happen to be so disease-ridden that they wiped out everyone in the Western hemisphere?

I speculate that the Europeans, apparently being at the center of the war against the non-human people, had become accustomed to the use of biological warfare. When they came to the New World, I speculate that the war between the humans and everyone else either wasn't happening, or hadn't been prosecuted as vigorously as elsewhere in the world. So the humans were as fair game as everyone else for biological weapons, being a kind of collaborator.

As an aside, I would wonder if the Black Plague might have been either a retaliation against the humans, or a kind of biological weapon misfire.

As for the Indians, the medieval Spanish were so filled with disease it killed everyone off- except not the North American Indians. But then later, probably the French all of a sudden were full of disease and were busy killing off the Indians in the northeast. Then way off in the 20th century, all of a sudden the people in California had some kind of plague that was 100% deadly against Indians, but left everyone else alone? Doubt it. Unless it was a plague of bullets.

I speculate that this biological warfare opened up the field for the human expansion, but it was only the development of superior weapons in the form of guns and cannons that really let them eradicate the other kinds of people.

So I speculate that the global elite are probably mainly descended from the leaders of this campaign to free the world for human settlement.

To me, this would explain why they feel so entitled. If it wasn't for them, none of what we see would be here.

Anyway, tell me what you think?

"Great Surprise"—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins
Ancient Megaliths and Historic sites
Competition
Donbass - Wikipedia
Anatoly Fomenko - Wikipedia
 

kentucky

Active member
Messages
37
Likes
142
#3
I'm also trying to synthesize a plausible narrative that combines much of what you've touched on, but also incorporates the "Grail" lore, the alleged descendants of the "Cain" mythos, and the giants of the ante-diluvian (pre-"mud-flood"?) era. Which is to say, I'm trying to figure out where the stories of vampires, werewolves, and giants come from.

There is the modern version that tells of a cannibalistic ruling class who drink the blood of the young in order to sustain and/or prolong their lives. This elite's lineage allegedly goes all the way back to the beginning of our history, or rather, at least to the beginning of our current false historical cannon when it was re-written, re-birthed - the Renaissance. It seems that the cabal that rules the world today had also ruled it for the last millennium through the Church and through the aristocracy/royalty that had also covered up all of the histories that had preceded them.

Surely there were giants (with big feet). The question is, were the giants the predator and man their prey? Did David slay Goliath to free mankind from his bondage, or was that propaganda? Did the giants die off, leaving behind a power vacuum by which the lesser beings fought among themselves to take the reins of the vacant throne? Did some of the lesser beings inherit the secrets of the bygone gods and, in their imperfection, fall prey to the lure of powers/knowledge not intended to be wielded by them?

Sorry for my folklorish ramblings. Ultimately, there does seem to be a palpable void, in both mainstream history and in our current mainstream understanding, that seems to serve as a placeholder for some "others" that seem to have lived (and/or are living) among us. Good post, thanks for bringing it up.
 
Last edited:

Moriarty

Active member
Messages
43
Likes
138
#4
I wrote this out quickly a little while back, just to have it down. I know it is not polished, but I just wanted to put the ideas out there and see what people thought. The forum I originally had intended this for was defunct when I went looking for it. I just came across this stolenhistory a couple of days ago. I have been looking through all the posts and I hope this will be alright. It does cross a lot of other stuff, but I didn't come across any other posts with the same angle as far as I could see.
===========================

So this is a hypothesis. Please contribute.

Hypothesis- in the relatively recent past there were other intelligent creatures sharing the Earth with human beings.

Argument-

So, I often have looked at charts of supposed human population growth since ancient times. You always will see the same chart- a steady slight increase for thousands of years. This is followed by a virtual 90 degree turn straight up, which explosive population growth we are still supposed to be in right now.

But if you look at the chart, it starts way back in about 1400. So what happened just then? Did we have some kind of major innovation just then? No. Some kind of new wonder crop? Did they discover penicillin? No.

But plainly something happened around then.

I recently realized why the population growth chart always looked a bit familiar.

It looks like a predator-prey population growth chart. You may have read that when predators decline, that prey populations will skyrocket. Then when predator populations recover, the prey population plummets. This leaves not enough food for the predators, and their own population declines. This allows the prey population to rebound, and it goes back and forth like that.

So I didn't necessarily think people were suffering depredation in the year 1300. So I wondered if maybe this chart might be showing the effects of inter-species competition, followed by a period when the competitors are suddenly removed.

So, as I was thinking of this, I was remembering reading that the Donbass region had been settled in the 17th century. The 17th century? It is right in the middle of everything. No one ever wanted to live there from the dawn of time until the 17th century? That doesn't make sense. But if the human population had been so low for so much of history, it makes more sense. There may not have been enough people to live there, even if they wanted to.

So back in all those centuries when the human population was so low, this supposedly is when people were knocking out these giant structures and public works projects, etc etc- pyramids, giant temples, whatever. But at the same time, they didn't even have enough people to fill up prime real estate all across Europe and Asia- let alone the rest of the world.

So, in the past I had read this book 1491
1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus - Wikipedia

It talks about the Europeans coming to America and all the Indians were wiped out by different European diseases, etc etc. The author attributes most of the decline in Western hemisphere population to disease from contact, rather than warfare with Europeans.

However, when I was thinking of it, here the Europeans came in 1492. You read of the Indians in Central and South America being wiped out by disease before the Europeans ever turn up, spread among the Indians by their own transportation systems. So these diseases are super contagious, run all through the whole continent of South America, all of Central America. But somehow the diseases didn't really get along up to North America in 1492, even with the Spanish tramping through Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, other areas down that way, even with explorers all up and down the eastern seaboard.

But then, when it is time for the Europeans to settle in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions, all of a sudden the Indians are being wiped out by disease again, having apparently withstood the spread of disease way back maybe 120 years earlier.

So at another time, I was thumbing through a local history book from Maine, and it mentioned that the woods were full of skeletons from Indians who dropped dead from disease conveniently just before the settlers started turning up.

I at another time was reading a book about Bigfoot by David Paulides, Tribal Bigfoot.
Tribal Bigfoot

There is literally one sentence in this book about a particular location. It refers to a conflict between the local Indians and the white people in I think as late as maybe the 1920s or something like that. This Indian tribe conveniently gets wiped out by some kind of plague so that they are out of the white people's hair.

Now how are the Indians being wiped out in 1920? They were exposed to European diseases probably by the early 1500s. The Spanish were all through there up until the 1800s. At the same time, the Russians were coming down into the same area from the 1700s. At the same time the English were exploring along through there. By the 1800s, the Americans are all through there until it becomes part of the USA. By the 1900s, California is well part of America. What in the world disease is wiping out a whole tribe in California at such a late date? Doesn't make sense.

Now in this 1491 book, and in many other places, people talk about how the Indians didn't have immunity to European diseases, etc etc. The 1491 book makes the argument that the Indians were uniquely vulnerable to European diseases because of the way their immune systems work. OK fine.

So at another time, I was reading a little monograph on the Guanches in the Canary Islands.
The White Indians of Nivaria

It is called The White Indians of Nivaria.

So it talks about how these Canary Islands off the coast of Africa were populated by Caucasian people. The islands were volcanic, which apparently means there will be no metal there. So these people were living in the Stone Age. They also were discovered by the Spanish.

Well, you may say, these guys weren't Indians with their crappy immune systems, so they won't be wiped out by Spanish diseases.

You will, however, be wrong if you think this, because the white Indians of Nivaria were equally wiped out by disease, just as the red Indians of America were.

Now I read this, and I said 'How the f many diseases did the Spanish have? How could they even have managed to stay alive in the boats long enough to get from one place to another to wipe everyone out by taking a dump in a canal or throwing up on a footpath, or whatever they were suppposed to have done.'

Now, on even yet another occasion, I was reading about supposedly some Roman artefacts discovered off the coast of Nova Scotia. Well, that many or may not be true. But everyone accepts that the Vikings came along to North America way back around the year 1,000. I also have read in the past that remains of European rats and sheep wool yarn have been discovered on islands in the Canadian Arctic, apparently from a time even longer ago than the Vikings. Alright, great.

But now, riddle me this, if the Europeans were in North America at least as far back at the year 1,000, why didn't all the Indians get wiped out at that time? Why didn't the Vikings just move in and find the woods full of Indian skeletons, the way settlers did later on?

Separately again, I came across references to a guy named Anatoly Fomenko over in Russia. He alleges that human history is basically all made up, and that we really can't even guess what our history could have been prior to about 1,000 years ago. He alleges that back at that time a thousand years ago, that there was essentially only one culture or civilization present, that kind of existed within a broader human population that was at a very low level of development. These civilized people kind of swanned around and did their thing, and savages kind of faded in and out of the world of civilization. So he alleges that people invented writing back then, and the idea of it spread all around, but people heard of it before they saw it in action, and some inventive people in different places had different takes on writing. Some of them wrote left to right, right to left, up to down, wrote with letters or pictures, etc etc

He also supposes that the progression from the invention of gunpowder to cannons and guns was much shorter than we are led to believe.

So anyway, he has all these notions about how things back then differ from what we are taught.

I actually don't think his ideas are quite right, but he does point out a lot of things that don't add up from history.

Not coming from the same background, but reaching similiar conclusions are this guy Miles W Mathis, who has all kind of articles about how this, that, and the other story from fairly recent times was actually fake. There is another guy in England, Chris Spivey, who puts out all these articles about news stories right now, today that he thinks are faked. So there may be this thread of faked history, fake news, fake stories, etc.

Following even another thread, there is a youtube channel called newearth. It is put on by a woman Silvia Ivanova from I think Bulgaria. She has a whole bunch of videos about, again, things that don't add up from history. She seems to have been maybe inspired by Fomenko, but doesn't follow his line.

I noticed in one video she was pointing out maps from the 1500s and 1600s of the Western hemisphere. She points out all the rivers of South America are mapped fairly accurately. The whole coast of South America is mapped, all of Central America, all of the eastern side of North America- but for some reason the northwest of North America is like 'terra incognita'. It is just kind of a doodle up in the corner of the map. She says, 'What was going on up here? They could sail the Straits of Magellan, but they can't find Vancouver?'

Again, it doesn't make sense.

So this woman makes this argument that there was a previous world-wide civilization. A new power grew up first in Europe and over several centuries went out to conquer this older civilization and wipe it out. She alleges that the last hold-outs of this older civilization existed in northeastern Asia and adjoining areas of northwestern North America.

A different youtuber, an Indian named Samuel Poe, has some videos where he talks about the 'Ojibway of Asia'. He says in his videos that the Ojibway lived both in western North America and northeastern Asia. He says that the Europeans were at war with the Ojibway. As time went by in this war, they managed to isolate the Ojibway in North America from the rest of their nation across the Bering Strait. Then they wore down the Indians until finally they were able to defeat them.

I said to myself, 'This is essentially the same story the other woman was theorizing, but from the other side.' It didn't appear these people knew each other. When I came across this guy's youtube channel, most of videos only had 40 or less views. So it seems unlikely that anyone was cribbing from him. Could be the other way around.

I kept the idea in the back of my head, and another time read an article about how the Indians have substantial genetic background from western Eurasia. From what I read, this would explain why even though the Indians supposedly came from Asia, they don't really look like people from Asia. They kind of come from another lost tribe that we don't really see elsewhere in the world. So that seems like it could be consistent with what Poe was saying, and also with what Ivanova was saying well.

So anyway, a lot of these 'there's something wrong with history people' people point out anomalous buildings and monuments and stuff. A lot of them appear to be for people bigger than human beings, and a lot appear to be intended for people smaller than human beings.

So this guy Lloyd Pie in a video was saying something about how there are three great apes- the gorilla, the chimp, and the orangutan. He points that in the fossil record there were three humanoid type groups, but now we just have people and we are rather unlike the rest of the primates. He attributes this to aliens or whatever. Doesn't really matter, but I just remembered that there is this possibility that there ought to be other kinds of humanoids hanging around besides ourselves.

Then, separately, of course, everyone knows all kinds of stories about fairies, brownies, whatever little people, and also stories about different kinds of giants. These stories are present all over the world it seems.

So I was thinking:

a. there maybe should be some other humanoids around, but we don't see any
b. we have possible evidence of other humanoids in the form of ruins that don't seem appropriate for the people we now see living all over the world

So, it seemed to me, what if in the fairly recent past there actually -were- other kinds of people living all around the world? It seems to me, this would account for why the human population didn't really grow that much for so long. The humans had their world, and the other people had their worlds, and the different groups didn't have too much interaction. But due to similar necessities of life, they interfered with each other's growth patterns, possibly keeping all of their populations fairly low.

Now, to go back to the population growth chart way up at the top of this, you see that sky-rocket take off.

What if this was due to the removal of competition? I am speculating that sometime in the lead-up to that sky-rocket that something happened to these other people out there. I am not an expert on this kind of thing, so I can't say what kind of lead time you would need to have before you would get a population explosion. But let's say it was 50 or a hundred years before that.

I am speculating that there was some kind of disease outbreak in these non-human populations, resulting in a radical decline in their numbers. Under 'natural' circumstances, the survivors would rebuild and pass on their partial immunity and the population would at some point rebound.

So, I am speculating that this 'natural' rebound didn't occur.

I am speculating that this outbreak probably was most severe either in Europe or the somewhere around the Middle East.

I speculate that some of the humans around at that time realized what was happening, and weaponized this disease. They used it to kill off all these non-human people.

Why would they do this?

If we take some of these ruins to actually be the ruins of non-human people, then we know they had a material culture. Therefore, they will have had some kind of wealth. The men who wiped them out would be able to take all of that wealth for themselves. These men would also now be able to expand into the areas that had been denied to them in the period of inter-species competition. So they would gain the wealth in land. This potential for expansion would also provide such men a wealth in the form of increased human population that they could hope to control. It seems like there would be a lot gain for certain individuals from a genocide like this.

However, we can suppose that not everyone would be onboard with this kind of thing. How would such men keep a lid on dissent? One way might be to start re-writing history- write these other people out of history.

'Whose castle is that?
- Mine.
Doesn't belong to the elf king?
- There is no elf king, so....... no.'

There also is this dynamic where people will wipe out another group, but then later they feel bad about it. If these men couldn't be sure that they had wiped out all the non-human people, they wouldn't want humans coming back in a hundred years feeling bad about killing everyone off, and trying to save them. If that happened, the humans might want to give back their stuff. That would be no good, of course.

So if the underlying speculation was true, it would provide a motive for the manipulation of history that we observe, but can't explain.

I was thinking at another time, that a lot of these stories about elves and things, the elves will do things to annoy people in out of the way places. They might let their horses out of the barn during the night, steal their food, you would only meet them at night or in very desolate and unpopulated areas.

These are all things that we see happening in the human world when one group loses a conflict with another group. The losers will run away. They will hide out. They may try to continue harrassing the winners, but now they are unable to operate openly or in a coordinated fashion, so they just cause random mayhem. The behavior of the elves or fairies now, to me, sounds a lot like the behavior of people who lost some kind of war or something.

Then, following the same line of thought, as time goes by, and the human population becomes denser and more extensive, the opportunity for isolated groups from the losing side to sustain themselves in organized communities will decline, learning will decline, trade will decline, maybe general levels of health. Who knows what happens when a whole people is forced into hiding? At some distance in time, they may even become isolated and in-bred and start to lose their ability even to survive at all, community or no.

This thought then reminded me of another line I had read in the Tribal Bigfoot. The author reports that some of the Indians had said that back in the old days the Bigfoots/Bigfeet had been accustomed to use fire, but they stopped using it after the arrival of the white man to avoid drawing attention to themselves. This makes me think that maybe the Bigfoot are the in-bred, isolated, lost all their culture descendants of some old-time race that used to have a bigger place in the world than it does now.

In the same way, stories of fairies from longer ago seem to talk about more fairies, with nicer houses, and just generally more going on. As time goes by it is less and less fairies, with apparently less and less going for them.

I once read a story about someone meeting a leprechaun in the 19th century and the leprechaun is lamenting that his people have declined so much in number from what they used to be.

So, to go back to the Guanches and the Indians. How did the Spanish happen to be so disease-ridden that they wiped out everyone in the Western hemisphere?

I speculate that the Europeans, apparently being at the center of the war against the non-human people, had become accustomed to the use of biological warfare. When they came to the New World, I speculate that the war between the humans and everyone else either wasn't happening, or hadn't been prosecuted as vigorously as elsewhere in the world. So the humans were as fair game as everyone else for biological weapons, being a kind of collaborator.

As an aside, I would wonder if the Black Plague might have been either a retaliation against the humans, or a kind of biological weapon misfire.

As for the Indians, the medieval Spanish were so filled with disease it killed everyone off- except not the North American Indians. But then later, probably the French all of a sudden were full of disease and were busy killing off the Indians in the northeast. Then way off in the 20th century, all of a sudden the people in California had some kind of plague that was 100% deadly against Indians, but left everyone else alone? Doubt it. Unless it was a plague of bullets.

I speculate that this biological warfare opened up the field for the human expansion, but it was only the development of superior weapons in the form of guns and cannons that really let them eradicate the other kinds of people.

So I speculate that the global elite are probably mainly descended from the leaders of this campaign to free the world for human settlement.

To me, this would explain why they feel so entitled. If it wasn't for them, none of what we see would be here.

Anyway, tell me what you think?

"Great Surprise"—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins
Ancient Megaliths and Historic sites
Competition
Donbass - Wikipedia
Anatoly Fomenko - Wikipedia
Super Post. And much food for thought. Apart from Chris Spivey who is a total idiot :)
 

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
92
Likes
261
#5
The Donbass was settled by the Yamnaya then the Scythians, then the Scyths migrated to Ossetia. Since these were Steppe cultures and migratory and it was a large migratory pathway my guess is it was a dangerous place which is why the Scyth's moved to Ossetia. Its been empty for a long time but still it being empty for so long supports your theory.


There is actually a very good, underrated movie that lost big time at the box office called "The Thirteenth Warrior" which deals directly with your theory perhaps coincidentally. A more contemporary Northern culture back around the year 900AD (my guess) clashes with a much more ancient culture that seems to be Matriarchal and cannibalistic. Being cannibalistic, this would be the predation method keeping the "good" half of mankind in check population wise according to your theory. Maybe the cannibal culture died out due to contagious prion diseases Epidemiological characteristics of human prion diseases | Infectious Diseases of Poverty | Full Text from eating human brains....


Evidence Of Cannibalism In Ancient Humans
""The human remains have been the subject of several studies,” says Bello. “In a previous analysis, we could determine that the cranial remains had been carefully modified to make skull-cups. During this research, however, we've identified a far greater degree of human modification than recorded in earlier research. We've found indubitable evidence for defleshing, disarticulation, human chewing, crushing of spongy bone, and the cracking of bones to extract marrow." "


For this theory to work according to your timeline there would have to be numerous cannibal cultures all over Europe until perhaps 1000 years ago. The "beauty" about this theory is the shame and odiousness of cannibalism could easily explain a rewrite of that history and any less depraved history associated with it. Who could blame Christians for inking that over? I wonder if proof of this is locked away under the Vatican.

Hate to say it but the popularity of zombie movies and serials suggests its in our genes.
BODY WORLDS – The Museum Experience in the heart of London! the popularity of exhibitions like this suggests that also. I halfheartedly suggested to a friend that we go see this at a local museum and she declined with a nauseated look on her face. I also share the feeling but that's why my invitation was halfhearted (really yuck as well) and I also was curious how she would react. The aversion to cannibalism could also be in our genes. There could be haplogroups that might just be a bit more interested in zombie movies than others.

Maybe prion diseases spread by cannibalism could explain why two groups formed over the millennial. There is a survival advantage for cannibalism since its energy efficient and survival advantage to avoid it which lowers chances for prion diseases.

My guess is you can't get prion diseases very easily by drinking human blood so there might have been a slow transition from cannibalism to just drinking blood. Prions and blood products. - PubMed - NCBI

also,

Did Bruce Fenton Find the Homeland of Bible Giants in the Caucasus Mountains?
"The extremely hard concrete was made of just two ingredients, with no sign of additional mortar. There was a type of very hard stone, the pieces being just a few inches or so in size, and then bone, in my view human bone. The bone seemed to make up about 25% of the mixture. This was horrible and disturbing but not in itself fantastical.

The real discovery was that the bone seemed to have been melted and then hardened again, the bone was itself the mortar for the stone. In some places it went at impossible right angles with no sign of breaking or shattering. Somehow the bone had been softened and then compressed with the stone pieces and then hardened again. There is no known technology that can achieve this. "
 
Last edited:

kentucky

Active member
Messages
37
Likes
142
#6
The Donbass was settled by the Yamnaya then the Sythians, then the Syths migrated to Ossetia. Since these were Steppe cultures and migratory and it was a large migratory pathway my guess is it was a dangerous place which is why the Syth's moved to Ossetia. Its been empty for a long time but still it being empty for so long supports your theory.


There is actually a very good, underrated movie that lost big time at the box office called "The Thirteenth Warrior" which deals directly with your theory perhaps coincidentally. A more contemporary Northern culture back around the year 900AD (my guess) clashes with a much more ancient culture that seems to be Matriarchal and cannibalistic. Being cannibalistic, this would be the predation method keeping the "good" half of mankind in check population wise according to your theory. Maybe the cannibal culture died out due to contagious prion diseases Epidemiological characteristics of human prion diseases | Infectious Diseases of Poverty | Full Text from eating human brains....


Evidence Of Cannibalism In Ancient Humans
""The human remains have been the subject of several studies,” says Bello. “In a previous analysis, we could determine that the cranial remains had been carefully modified to make skull-cups. During this research, however, we've identified a far greater degree of human modification than recorded in earlier research. We've found indubitable evidence for defleshing, disarticulation, human chewing, crushing of spongy bone, and the cracking of bones to extract marrow." "


For this theory to work according to your timeline there would have to be numerous cannibal cultures all over Europe until perhaps 1000 years ago. The "beauty" about this theory is the shame and odiousness of cannibalism could easily explain a rewrite of that history and any less depraved history associated with it. Who could blame Christians for inking that over? I wonder if proof of this is locked away under the Vatican.

Hate to say it but the popularity of zombie movies and serials suggests its in our genes.
BODY WORLDS – The Museum Experience in the heart of London! the popularity of exhibitions like this suggests that also. I halfheartedly suggested to a friend that we go see this at a local museum and she declined with a nauseated look on her face. I also share the feeling but that's why my invitation was halfhearted (really yuck as well) and I also was curious how she would react. The aversion to cannibalism could also be in our genes. There could be haplogroups that might just be a bit more interested in zombie movies than others.

Maybe prion diseases spread by cannibalism could explain why two groups formed over the millennial. There is a survival advantage for cannibalism since its energy efficient and survival advantage to avoid it which lowers chances for prion diseases.

My guess is you can't get prion diseases very easily by drinking human blood so there might have been a slow transition from cannibalism to just drinking blood. Prions and blood products. - PubMed - NCBI

also,

Did Bruce Fenton Find the Homeland of Bible Giants in the Caucasus Mountains?
"The extremely hard concrete was made of just two ingredients, with no sign of additional mortar. There was a type of very hard stone, the pieces being just a few inches or so in size, and then bone, in my view human bone. The bone seemed to make up about 25% of the mixture. This was horrible and disturbing but not in itself fantastical.

The real discovery was that the bone seemed to have been melted and then hardened again, the bone was itself the mortar for the stone. In some places it went at impossible right angles with no sign of breaking or shattering. Somehow the bone had been softened and then compressed with the stone pieces and then hardened again. There is no known technology that can achieve this. "
Great tie-ins, thank you very much.
 

CyborgNinja

Well-known member
Messages
234
Likes
917
#7
Hello and welcome. I agree there is good evidence to suggest multiple species of human living on earth. I don't nessesarily think they were locked in any kind of three way mexican standoff for resources.

It would be impractical to assume they all appeared on the scene similatinously. Perhaps the most advanced of these groups helped faciltate the other groups.

Merry Christmas and thanks for your input.
Post automatically merged:

Evidence Of Cannibalism In Ancient Humans
""The human remains have been the subject of several studies,” says Bello. “In a previous analysis, we could determine that the cranial remains had been carefully modified to make skull-cups. During this research, however, we've identified a far greater degree of human modification than recorded in earlier research. We've found indubitable evidence for defleshing, disarticulation, human chewing, crushing of spongy bone, and the cracking of bones to extract marrow." "
Did this cannibalism happen during your deep antiquity matriarchy utopia too? Or was this happening in same place where women weren't incharge?
 
Last edited:
Messages
17
Likes
90
#8
I wrote this out quickly a little while back, just to have it down. I know it is not polished, but I just wanted to put the ideas out there and see what people thought. The forum I originally had intended this for was defunct when I went looking for it. I just came across this stolenhistory a couple of days ago. I have been looking through all the posts and I hope this will be alright. It does cross a lot of other stuff, but I didn't come across any other posts with the same angle as far as I could see.
===========================

So this is a hypothesis. Please contribute.

Hypothesis- in the relatively recent past there were other intelligent creatures sharing the Earth with human beings.

Argument-

So, I often have looked at charts of supposed human population growth since ancient times. You always will see the same chart- a steady slight increase for thousands of years. This is followed by a virtual 90 degree turn straight up, which explosive population growth we are still supposed to be in right now.

But if you look at the chart, it starts way back in about 1400. So what happened just then? Did we have some kind of major innovation just then? No. Some kind of new wonder crop? Did they discover penicillin? No.

But plainly something happened around then.

I recently realized why the population growth chart always looked a bit familiar.

It looks like a predator-prey population growth chart. You may have read that when predators decline, that prey populations will skyrocket. Then when predator populations recover, the prey population plummets. This leaves not enough food for the predators, and their own population declines. This allows the prey population to rebound, and it goes back and forth like that.

So I didn't necessarily think people were suffering depredation in the year 1300. So I wondered if maybe this chart might be showing the effects of inter-species competition, followed by a period when the competitors are suddenly removed.

So, as I was thinking of this, I was remembering reading that the Donbass region had been settled in the 17th century. The 17th century? It is right in the middle of everything. No one ever wanted to live there from the dawn of time until the 17th century? That doesn't make sense. But if the human population had been so low for so much of history, it makes more sense. There may not have been enough people to live there, even if they wanted to.

So back in all those centuries when the human population was so low, this supposedly is when people were knocking out these giant structures and public works projects, etc etc- pyramids, giant temples, whatever. But at the same time, they didn't even have enough people to fill up prime real estate all across Europe and Asia- let alone the rest of the world.

So, in the past I had read this book 1491
1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus - Wikipedia

It talks about the Europeans coming to America and all the Indians were wiped out by different European diseases, etc etc. The author attributes most of the decline in Western hemisphere population to disease from contact, rather than warfare with Europeans.

However, when I was thinking of it, here the Europeans came in 1492. You read of the Indians in Central and South America being wiped out by disease before the Europeans ever turn up, spread among the Indians by their own transportation systems. So these diseases are super contagious, run all through the whole continent of South America, all of Central America. But somehow the diseases didn't really get along up to North America in 1492, even with the Spanish tramping through Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, other areas down that way, even with explorers all up and down the eastern seaboard.

But then, when it is time for the Europeans to settle in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions, all of a sudden the Indians are being wiped out by disease again, having apparently withstood the spread of disease way back maybe 120 years earlier.

So at another time, I was thumbing through a local history book from Maine, and it mentioned that the woods were full of skeletons from Indians who dropped dead from disease conveniently just before the settlers started turning up.

I at another time was reading a book about Bigfoot by David Paulides, Tribal Bigfoot.
Tribal Bigfoot

There is literally one sentence in this book about a particular location. It refers to a conflict between the local Indians and the white people in I think as late as maybe the 1920s or something like that. This Indian tribe conveniently gets wiped out by some kind of plague so that they are out of the white people's hair.

Now how are the Indians being wiped out in 1920? They were exposed to European diseases probably by the early 1500s. The Spanish were all through there up until the 1800s. At the same time, the Russians were coming down into the same area from the 1700s. At the same time the English were exploring along through there. By the 1800s, the Americans are all through there until it becomes part of the USA. By the 1900s, California is well part of America. What in the world disease is wiping out a whole tribe in California at such a late date? Doesn't make sense.

Now in this 1491 book, and in many other places, people talk about how the Indians didn't have immunity to European diseases, etc etc. The 1491 book makes the argument that the Indians were uniquely vulnerable to European diseases because of the way their immune systems work. OK fine.

So at another time, I was reading a little monograph on the Guanches in the Canary Islands.
The White Indians of Nivaria

It is called The White Indians of Nivaria.

So it talks about how these Canary Islands off the coast of Africa were populated by Caucasian people. The islands were volcanic, which apparently means there will be no metal there. So these people were living in the Stone Age. They also were discovered by the Spanish.

Well, you may say, these guys weren't Indians with their crappy immune systems, so they won't be wiped out by Spanish diseases.

You will, however, be wrong if you think this, because the white Indians of Nivaria were equally wiped out by disease, just as the red Indians of America were.

Now I read this, and I said 'How the f many diseases did the Spanish have? How could they even have managed to stay alive in the boats long enough to get from one place to another to wipe everyone out by taking a dump in a canal or throwing up on a footpath, or whatever they were suppposed to have done.'

Now, on even yet another occasion, I was reading about supposedly some Roman artefacts discovered off the coast of Nova Scotia. Well, that many or may not be true. But everyone accepts that the Vikings came along to North America way back around the year 1,000. I also have read in the past that remains of European rats and sheep wool yarn have been discovered on islands in the Canadian Arctic, apparently from a time even longer ago than the Vikings. Alright, great.

But now, riddle me this, if the Europeans were in North America at least as far back at the year 1,000, why didn't all the Indians get wiped out at that time? Why didn't the Vikings just move in and find the woods full of Indian skeletons, the way settlers did later on?

Separately again, I came across references to a guy named Anatoly Fomenko over in Russia. He alleges that human history is basically all made up, and that we really can't even guess what our history could have been prior to about 1,000 years ago. He alleges that back at that time a thousand years ago, that there was essentially only one culture or civilization present, that kind of existed within a broader human population that was at a very low level of development. These civilized people kind of swanned around and did their thing, and savages kind of faded in and out of the world of civilization. So he alleges that people invented writing back then, and the idea of it spread all around, but people heard of it before they saw it in action, and some inventive people in different places had different takes on writing. Some of them wrote left to right, right to left, up to down, wrote with letters or pictures, etc etc

He also supposes that the progression from the invention of gunpowder to cannons and guns was much shorter than we are led to believe.

So anyway, he has all these notions about how things back then differ from what we are taught.

I actually don't think his ideas are quite right, but he does point out a lot of things that don't add up from history.

Not coming from the same background, but reaching similiar conclusions are this guy Miles W Mathis, who has all kind of articles about how this, that, and the other story from fairly recent times was actually fake. There is another guy in England, Chris Spivey, who puts out all these articles about news stories right now, today that he thinks are faked. So there may be this thread of faked history, fake news, fake stories, etc.

Following even another thread, there is a youtube channel called newearth. It is put on by a woman Silvia Ivanova from I think Bulgaria. She has a whole bunch of videos about, again, things that don't add up from history. She seems to have been maybe inspired by Fomenko, but doesn't follow his line.

I noticed in one video she was pointing out maps from the 1500s and 1600s of the Western hemisphere. She points out all the rivers of South America are mapped fairly accurately. The whole coast of South America is mapped, all of Central America, all of the eastern side of North America- but for some reason the northwest of North America is like 'terra incognita'. It is just kind of a doodle up in the corner of the map. She says, 'What was going on up here? They could sail the Straits of Magellan, but they can't find Vancouver?'

Again, it doesn't make sense.

So this woman makes this argument that there was a previous world-wide civilization. A new power grew up first in Europe and over several centuries went out to conquer this older civilization and wipe it out. She alleges that the last hold-outs of this older civilization existed in northeastern Asia and adjoining areas of northwestern North America.

A different youtuber, an Indian named Samuel Poe, has some videos where he talks about the 'Ojibway of Asia'. He says in his videos that the Ojibway lived both in western North America and northeastern Asia. He says that the Europeans were at war with the Ojibway. As time went by in this war, they managed to isolate the Ojibway in North America from the rest of their nation across the Bering Strait. Then they wore down the Indians until finally they were able to defeat them.

I said to myself, 'This is essentially the same story the other woman was theorizing, but from the other side.' It didn't appear these people knew each other. When I came across this guy's youtube channel, most of videos only had 40 or less views. So it seems unlikely that anyone was cribbing from him. Could be the other way around.

I kept the idea in the back of my head, and another time read an article about how the Indians have substantial genetic background from western Eurasia. From what I read, this would explain why even though the Indians supposedly came from Asia, they don't really look like people from Asia. They kind of come from another lost tribe that we don't really see elsewhere in the world. So that seems like it could be consistent with what Poe was saying, and also with what Ivanova was saying well.

So anyway, a lot of these 'there's something wrong with history people' people point out anomalous buildings and monuments and stuff. A lot of them appear to be for people bigger than human beings, and a lot appear to be intended for people smaller than human beings.

So this guy Lloyd Pie in a video was saying something about how there are three great apes- the gorilla, the chimp, and the orangutan. He points that in the fossil record there were three humanoid type groups, but now we just have people and we are rather unlike the rest of the primates. He attributes this to aliens or whatever. Doesn't really matter, but I just remembered that there is this possibility that there ought to be other kinds of humanoids hanging around besides ourselves.

Then, separately, of course, everyone knows all kinds of stories about fairies, brownies, whatever little people, and also stories about different kinds of giants. These stories are present all over the world it seems.

So I was thinking:

a. there maybe should be some other humanoids around, but we don't see any
b. we have possible evidence of other humanoids in the form of ruins that don't seem appropriate for the people we now see living all over the world

So, it seemed to me, what if in the fairly recent past there actually -were- other kinds of people living all around the world? It seems to me, this would account for why the human population didn't really grow that much for so long. The humans had their world, and the other people had their worlds, and the different groups didn't have too much interaction. But due to similar necessities of life, they interfered with each other's growth patterns, possibly keeping all of their populations fairly low.

Now, to go back to the population growth chart way up at the top of this, you see that sky-rocket take off.

What if this was due to the removal of competition? I am speculating that sometime in the lead-up to that sky-rocket that something happened to these other people out there. I am not an expert on this kind of thing, so I can't say what kind of lead time you would need to have before you would get a population explosion. But let's say it was 50 or a hundred years before that.

I am speculating that there was some kind of disease outbreak in these non-human populations, resulting in a radical decline in their numbers. Under 'natural' circumstances, the survivors would rebuild and pass on their partial immunity and the population would at some point rebound.

So, I am speculating that this 'natural' rebound didn't occur.

I am speculating that this outbreak probably was most severe either in Europe or the somewhere around the Middle East.

I speculate that some of the humans around at that time realized what was happening, and weaponized this disease. They used it to kill off all these non-human people.

Why would they do this?

If we take some of these ruins to actually be the ruins of non-human people, then we know they had a material culture. Therefore, they will have had some kind of wealth. The men who wiped them out would be able to take all of that wealth for themselves. These men would also now be able to expand into the areas that had been denied to them in the period of inter-species competition. So they would gain the wealth in land. This potential for expansion would also provide such men a wealth in the form of increased human population that they could hope to control. It seems like there would be a lot gain for certain individuals from a genocide like this.

However, we can suppose that not everyone would be onboard with this kind of thing. How would such men keep a lid on dissent? One way might be to start re-writing history- write these other people out of history.

'Whose castle is that?
- Mine.
Doesn't belong to the elf king?
- There is no elf king, so....... no.'

There also is this dynamic where people will wipe out another group, but then later they feel bad about it. If these men couldn't be sure that they had wiped out all the non-human people, they wouldn't want humans coming back in a hundred years feeling bad about killing everyone off, and trying to save them. If that happened, the humans might want to give back their stuff. That would be no good, of course.

So if the underlying speculation was true, it would provide a motive for the manipulation of history that we observe, but can't explain.

I was thinking at another time, that a lot of these stories about elves and things, the elves will do things to annoy people in out of the way places. They might let their horses out of the barn during the night, steal their food, you would only meet them at night or in very desolate and unpopulated areas.

These are all things that we see happening in the human world when one group loses a conflict with another group. The losers will run away. They will hide out. They may try to continue harrassing the winners, but now they are unable to operate openly or in a coordinated fashion, so they just cause random mayhem. The behavior of the elves or fairies now, to me, sounds a lot like the behavior of people who lost some kind of war or something.

Then, following the same line of thought, as time goes by, and the human population becomes denser and more extensive, the opportunity for isolated groups from the losing side to sustain themselves in organized communities will decline, learning will decline, trade will decline, maybe general levels of health. Who knows what happens when a whole people is forced into hiding? At some distance in time, they may even become isolated and in-bred and start to lose their ability even to survive at all, community or no.

This thought then reminded me of another line I had read in the Tribal Bigfoot. The author reports that some of the Indians had said that back in the old days the Bigfoots/Bigfeet had been accustomed to use fire, but they stopped using it after the arrival of the white man to avoid drawing attention to themselves. This makes me think that maybe the Bigfoot are the in-bred, isolated, lost all their culture descendants of some old-time race that used to have a bigger place in the world than it does now.

In the same way, stories of fairies from longer ago seem to talk about more fairies, with nicer houses, and just generally more going on. As time goes by it is less and less fairies, with apparently less and less going for them.

I once read a story about someone meeting a leprechaun in the 19th century and the leprechaun is lamenting that his people have declined so much in number from what they used to be.

So, to go back to the Guanches and the Indians. How did the Spanish happen to be so disease-ridden that they wiped out everyone in the Western hemisphere?

I speculate that the Europeans, apparently being at the center of the war against the non-human people, had become accustomed to the use of biological warfare. When they came to the New World, I speculate that the war between the humans and everyone else either wasn't happening, or hadn't been prosecuted as vigorously as elsewhere in the world. So the humans were as fair game as everyone else for biological weapons, being a kind of collaborator.

As an aside, I would wonder if the Black Plague might have been either a retaliation against the humans, or a kind of biological weapon misfire.

As for the Indians, the medieval Spanish were so filled with disease it killed everyone off- except not the North American Indians. But then later, probably the French all of a sudden were full of disease and were busy killing off the Indians in the northeast. Then way off in the 20th century, all of a sudden the people in California had some kind of plague that was 100% deadly against Indians, but left everyone else alone? Doubt it. Unless it was a plague of bullets.

I speculate that this biological warfare opened up the field for the human expansion, but it was only the development of superior weapons in the form of guns and cannons that really let them eradicate the other kinds of people.

So I speculate that the global elite are probably mainly descended from the leaders of this campaign to free the world for human settlement.

To me, this would explain why they feel so entitled. If it wasn't for them, none of what we see would be here.

Anyway, tell me what you think?

"Great Surprise"—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins
Ancient Megaliths and Historic sites
Competition
Donbass - Wikipedia
Anatoly Fomenko - Wikipedia
CANNIBALISM! Cannibals world wide in antiquity, and some apparently still active today. We're called long pig when on the menu.
Long pig – Grammarist

I don't know if you are aware of the red haired tribes from the western USA. They were cannibals. Here's some info from wiki:
Si-Te-Cah - Wikipedia

Lots of skeptic blogs denying the legend, of course. Here's a story telling about some of the stuff from the cave they were willing to let us see.
Lovelock Cave: A Tale of Giants or A Giant Tale of Fiction?

I tend to trust the word of the people who were there.
Sarah Winnemucca Hopkins wrote a wonderful book I highly recommend "Life Among the Piutes: Their Wrongs and Claims."
Life Among the Piutes: Their Wrongs and Claims.

It seems one of their peoples greatest fears was cannibalism. Here's an excerpt:

Among the traditions of our people is one of a small tribe of barbarians who used to live along the Humboldt River. It was many hundred years ago. They used to waylay my people and kill and eat them. They would dig large holes in our trails at night, and if any of our people travelled at night, which they did, for they were afraid of these barbarous people, they would oftentimes fall into these holes. That tribe would even eat their own dead – yes, they would even come and dig up our dead after they were buried, and would carry them off and eat them. Now and then they would come and make war on my people. They would fight, and as fast as they killed one another on either side, the women would carry off those who were killed. My people say they were very brave. When they were fighting they would jump up in the air after the arrows that went over their heads, and shoot the same arrows back again. My people took some of them into their families, but they could not make them like themselves. So at last they made war on them. This war lasted a long time. Their number was about twenty-six hundred (2600). The war lasted some three years. My people killed them in great numbers, and what few were left went into the thick bush. My people set the bush on fire. This was right above Humboldt Lake. Then they went to work and made tuly or bulrush boats, and went into Humboldt Lake. They could not live there very long without fire. They were nearly starving. My people were watching them all round the lake, and would kill them as fast as they would come on land. At last one night they all landed on the east side of the lake, and went into a cave near the mountains. It was a most horrible place, for my people watched at the mouth of the cave, and would kill them as they came out to get water. My people would ask them if they would be like us, and not eat people like coyotes or beasts. They talked the same language, but they would not give up. At last my people were tired, and they went to work and gathered wood, and began to fill up the mouth of the cave. Then the poor fools began to pull the wood inside till the cave was full. At last my people set it on fire; at the same time they cried out to them, "Will you give up and be like men, and not eat people like beasts? Say quick – we will put out the fire." No answer came from them. My people said they thought the cave must be very deep or far into the mountain. They had never seen the cave nor known it was there until then. They called out to them as loud as they could, "Will you give up? Say so, or you will all die." But no answer came. Then they all left the place. In ten days some went back to see if the fire had gone out. They went back to my third or fifth great-grandfather and told him they must all be dead, there was such a horrible smell. This tribe was called people-eaters, and after my people had killed them all, the people round us called us Say-do-carah. It means conqueror; it also means "enemy." I do not know how we came by the name of Piutes. It is not an Indian word. I think it is misinterpreted. Sometimes we are called Pine-nut eaters, for we are the only tribe that lives in the country where Pine-nuts grow. My people say that the tribe we exterminated had reddish hair. I have some of their hair, which has been handed down from father to son. I have a dress which has been in our family a great many years, trimmed with this reddish hair. I am going to wear it some time when I lecture. It is called the mourning dress, and no one has such a dress but my family.

That is just one legend.

Those missionaries of old spent a good deal of time trying to rid the world of cannibalism often times met their fate in a fire pit.
Cannibal tribe apologises for eating Methodists

There are may depictions of cannibalism on ancient maps as well as missionary / religious maps that show areas to avoid. I'll try to dig some up for you when I get the time.
 

Jacob

New member
Messages
6
Likes
22
#9
CANNIBALISM! Cannibals world wide in antiquity, and some apparently still active today. We're called long pig when on the menu.
Long pig – Grammarist

I don't know if you are aware of the red haired tribes from the western USA. They were cannibals. Here's some info from wiki:
Si-Te-Cah - Wikipedia

Lots of skeptic blogs denying the legend, of course. Here's a story telling about some of the stuff from the cave they were willing to let us see.
Lovelock Cave: A Tale of Giants or A Giant Tale of Fiction?

I tend to trust the word of the people who were there.
Sarah Winnemucca Hopkins wrote a wonderful book I highly recommend "Life Among the Piutes: Their Wrongs and Claims."
Life Among the Piutes: Their Wrongs and Claims.

It seems one of their peoples greatest fears was cannibalism. Here's an excerpt:

Among the traditions of our people is one of a small tribe of barbarians who used to live along the Humboldt River. It was many hundred years ago. They used to waylay my people and kill and eat them. They would dig large holes in our trails at night, and if any of our people travelled at night, which they did, for they were afraid of these barbarous people, they would oftentimes fall into these holes. That tribe would even eat their own dead – yes, they would even come and dig up our dead after they were buried, and would carry them off and eat them. Now and then they would come and make war on my people. They would fight, and as fast as they killed one another on either side, the women would carry off those who were killed. My people say they were very brave. When they were fighting they would jump up in the air after the arrows that went over their heads, and shoot the same arrows back again. My people took some of them into their families, but they could not make them like themselves. So at last they made war on them. This war lasted a long time. Their number was about twenty-six hundred (2600). The war lasted some three years. My people killed them in great numbers, and what few were left went into the thick bush. My people set the bush on fire. This was right above Humboldt Lake. Then they went to work and made tuly or bulrush boats, and went into Humboldt Lake. They could not live there very long without fire. They were nearly starving. My people were watching them all round the lake, and would kill them as fast as they would come on land. At last one night they all landed on the east side of the lake, and went into a cave near the mountains. It was a most horrible place, for my people watched at the mouth of the cave, and would kill them as they came out to get water. My people would ask them if they would be like us, and not eat people like coyotes or beasts. They talked the same language, but they would not give up. At last my people were tired, and they went to work and gathered wood, and began to fill up the mouth of the cave. Then the poor fools began to pull the wood inside till the cave was full. At last my people set it on fire; at the same time they cried out to them, "Will you give up and be like men, and not eat people like beasts? Say quick – we will put out the fire." No answer came from them. My people said they thought the cave must be very deep or far into the mountain. They had never seen the cave nor known it was there until then. They called out to them as loud as they could, "Will you give up? Say so, or you will all die." But no answer came. Then they all left the place. In ten days some went back to see if the fire had gone out. They went back to my third or fifth great-grandfather and told him they must all be dead, there was such a horrible smell. This tribe was called people-eaters, and after my people had killed them all, the people round us called us Say-do-carah. It means conqueror; it also means "enemy." I do not know how we came by the name of Piutes. It is not an Indian word. I think it is misinterpreted. Sometimes we are called Pine-nut eaters, for we are the only tribe that lives in the country where Pine-nuts grow. My people say that the tribe we exterminated had reddish hair. I have some of their hair, which has been handed down from father to son. I have a dress which has been in our family a great many years, trimmed with this reddish hair. I am going to wear it some time when I lecture. It is called the mourning dress, and no one has such a dress but my family.

That is just one legend.

Those missionaries of old spent a good deal of time trying to rid the world of cannibalism often times met their fate in a fire pit.
Cannibal tribe apologises for eating Methodists

There are may depictions of cannibalism on ancient maps as well as missionary / religious maps that show areas to avoid. I'll try to dig some up for you when I get the time.
Could it be a possibility if these cannibals have some kind of connection with gog and magog, because some historians have identified Gog and Magog as Scythians.

If you do not know who Gog and Magog is, i recommend you to read this
Gog and Magog - Wikipedia
And watch this video
 

kentucky

Active member
Messages
37
Likes
142
#10
CANNIBALISM! Cannibals world wide in antiquity, and some apparently still active today. We're called long pig when on the menu.
Long pig – Grammarist

I don't know if you are aware of the red haired tribes from the western USA. They were cannibals. Here's some info from wiki:
Si-Te-Cah - Wikipedia

Lots of skeptic blogs denying the legend, of course. Here's a story telling about some of the stuff from the cave they were willing to let us see.
Lovelock Cave: A Tale of Giants or A Giant Tale of Fiction?

I tend to trust the word of the people who were there.
Sarah Winnemucca Hopkins wrote a wonderful book I highly recommend "Life Among the Piutes: Their Wrongs and Claims."
Life Among the Piutes: Their Wrongs and Claims.

It seems one of their peoples greatest fears was cannibalism. Here's an excerpt:

Among the traditions of our people is one of a small tribe of barbarians who used to live along the Humboldt River. It was many hundred years ago. They used to waylay my people and kill and eat them. They would dig large holes in our trails at night, and if any of our people travelled at night, which they did, for they were afraid of these barbarous people, they would oftentimes fall into these holes. That tribe would even eat their own dead – yes, they would even come and dig up our dead after they were buried, and would carry them off and eat them. Now and then they would come and make war on my people. They would fight, and as fast as they killed one another on either side, the women would carry off those who were killed. My people say they were very brave. When they were fighting they would jump up in the air after the arrows that went over their heads, and shoot the same arrows back again. My people took some of them into their families, but they could not make them like themselves. So at last they made war on them. This war lasted a long time. Their number was about twenty-six hundred (2600). The war lasted some three years. My people killed them in great numbers, and what few were left went into the thick bush. My people set the bush on fire. This was right above Humboldt Lake. Then they went to work and made tuly or bulrush boats, and went into Humboldt Lake. They could not live there very long without fire. They were nearly starving. My people were watching them all round the lake, and would kill them as fast as they would come on land. At last one night they all landed on the east side of the lake, and went into a cave near the mountains. It was a most horrible place, for my people watched at the mouth of the cave, and would kill them as they came out to get water. My people would ask them if they would be like us, and not eat people like coyotes or beasts. They talked the same language, but they would not give up. At last my people were tired, and they went to work and gathered wood, and began to fill up the mouth of the cave. Then the poor fools began to pull the wood inside till the cave was full. At last my people set it on fire; at the same time they cried out to them, "Will you give up and be like men, and not eat people like beasts? Say quick – we will put out the fire." No answer came from them. My people said they thought the cave must be very deep or far into the mountain. They had never seen the cave nor known it was there until then. They called out to them as loud as they could, "Will you give up? Say so, or you will all die." But no answer came. Then they all left the place. In ten days some went back to see if the fire had gone out. They went back to my third or fifth great-grandfather and told him they must all be dead, there was such a horrible smell. This tribe was called people-eaters, and after my people had killed them all, the people round us called us Say-do-carah. It means conqueror; it also means "enemy." I do not know how we came by the name of Piutes. It is not an Indian word. I think it is misinterpreted. Sometimes we are called Pine-nut eaters, for we are the only tribe that lives in the country where Pine-nuts grow. My people say that the tribe we exterminated had reddish hair. I have some of their hair, which has been handed down from father to son. I have a dress which has been in our family a great many years, trimmed with this reddish hair. I am going to wear it some time when I lecture. It is called the mourning dress, and no one has such a dress but my family.

That is just one legend.

Those missionaries of old spent a good deal of time trying to rid the world of cannibalism often times met their fate in a fire pit.
Cannibal tribe apologises for eating Methodists

There are may depictions of cannibalism on ancient maps as well as missionary / religious maps that show areas to avoid. I'll try to dig some up for you when I get the time.
Such a fascinating tale, thank you for sharing it. From a stream of consciousness perspective, for me, it invokes imagery of old Bugs Bunny cartoons where the missionaries and other Dr. Livingstones (I presume) would find themselves in a giant cauldron fit for Pygmie stew. Looking into Dr. Livingstone, I found an interesting entry in one of his writings, the Unyanyembe journal, where he offered the following perspective:

Almost every time he encounters a new ethnic group, for instance, he records their tattoos; describes their teeth, facial features and/or body type; and speculates on the possibility that they engage in cannibalism. Evidence elsewhere suggests that the local populations in Manyema actually pretended to be cannibals as a strategy of resistance, thereby compelling Livingstone to return to this question time and again, as he writes in a letter to the Earl of Clarendon: “The Manyema are certainly cannibals but it was long ere I could get evidence more positive than would have led a Scotch jury to give a verdict of not proven - they eat only enemies killed in war”
The part that draws my interest is the notion that these natives weren't so much cannibal "savages" as they were ritual eaters, in this case, not seeking to dine on flesh, but rather doing so (eating the bodies of their fallen enemies) for other motivations, be it honoring them or taking on the powers of those they ate - or, as the passage indicated, pretending to be literally as blood-thirsty, as a fear tactic, ritual aside. Regardless, other Livingstone documents showed that he flipped-flopped and often contradicted his own categorization or whether or not these aboriginal tribes were cannibals or not.

With that said the red-haired nature of the tribe seemed to wink at tales of red-headed people found across the world, and, in the case of the naming of the people (which the local storyteller admits he didn't know it's origin), the Piutes and the "Pine-nut eaters" seem too much of a coincidental nod at the pituitary gland/pineal gland, to be ignored - as it isn’t mere flesh and brains that these modern vampiric zombies allegedly seek to feast on, but perhaps the adrenal glands.

In addition to the pineal gland being venerated by the Holy See in its iconography, the adrenal gland system as a whole is what is allegedly sought by the cannibals of today, from which they extract adrenochrome, or at least says the modern myth. And, for those that haven't been keeping score, the idea that there may be a relationship to blood-drinkers living Cain-like existences, roaming the earth as the un-dying, there are anecdotal studies that are trying to suggest just that - that the blood of the young can prolong life when taken in. But, I digress.
 
Last edited:

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
92
Likes
261
#11
"Could it be a possibility if these cannibals have some kind of connection with gog and magog, because some historians have identified Gog and Magog as Scythians."

Ossetians are the last of the Scythians. Might be some references in their mythology or maybe they wiped their myths clean of cannibalism references.

Ossetians - Wikipedia
Ossetian mythology - Wikipedia
http://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/i10766.pdf The Scythian legends[/QUOTE]
Post automatically merged:

Hello and welcome. I agree there is good evidence to suggest multiple species of human living on earth. I don't nessesarily think they were locked in any kind of three way mexican standoff for resources.

It would be impractical to assume they all appeared on the scene similatinously. Perhaps the most advanced of these groups helped faciltate the other groups.

Merry Christmas and thanks for your input.
Post automatically merged:


Did this cannibalism happen during your deep antiquity matriarchy utopia too? Or was this happening in same place where women weren't incharge?

I am on record here saying deep antiquity might have been the "opposite" of utopia where matriarchies were prevalent. Now that I think about it, the theory of the bicameral mind Bicameralism (psychology) - Wikipedia
lends a bit of support to the notion of dystopian (from our perspective) societies both matriarchy and patriarchy dominant in the distant past. The notion is that there were those "woke" and those not so woke. The woke dominate the unwoke naturally.
My guess is that the less conscious a society is the more prone it might be towards cannibalism.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
M
Messages
12
Likes
68
#12
I have not seen that movie, but I did read the book it was based on. I agree there could be something to that. Don't know what to say about the cannibalism as a general proposition. I feel like it would have to have been pretty widespread to have been suppressing population growth.
 

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
92
Likes
261
#13
I have not seen that movie, but I did read the book it was based on. I agree there could be something to that. Don't know what to say about the cannibalism as a general proposition. I feel like it would have to have been pretty widespread to have been suppressing population growth.
There are a lot of bugs - bacteria and viruses that linger for ages in soil that kill outright or take decades once inside the body for a slow kill. It can kill you in 24 hours simply by breathing This particular bacteria could have been weaponized 100-200 years ago maybe. Perfect way for ET's to keep a population down then to pave the way for a human population explosion time it so the bacteria die when you want or create a virus to kill the bacteria and release it.
 

0harris0

Member
Messages
46
Likes
80
#14
So I was thinking:

a. there maybe should be some other humanoids around, but we don't see any
b. we have possible evidence of other humanoids in the form of ruins that don't seem appropriate for the people we now see living all over the world

So, it seemed to me, what if in the fairly recent past there actually -were- other kinds of people living all around the world? It seems to me, this would account for why the human population didn't really grow that much for so long. The humans had their world, and the other people had their worlds, and the different groups didn't have too much interaction. But due to similar necessities of life, they interfered with each other's growth patterns, possibly keeping all of their populations fairly low.
Neanderthals but probably not advanced at all, then you have:

Denisovans (from central russia), with "60000 year old" drilling evidence?
Denisovan - Wikipedia

and Cro-Magnon, who were basically homo sapiens... but bigger, stronger and with potentially larger brains...?!?!?
Cro-Magnon rock shelter - Wikipedia
 

sonoman

Well-known member
Messages
156
Likes
329
#15
Jan Irvin and his group have done quite alot of research into the plaques and narrowed it down to IIRC the puritains but points out (with very compelling evidence) that they were actually cryptos.

Ive been pondering the 'giants', I think they existed at one time for sure, I look at house cats compared to mountain lions etc and see that its not beyond nature to have giant people.

no way our size people could eliminate giants without something like biological weapons IMO.

love Silvia (newearth). her vids are wonderful but her voice puts me to sleep lol. maybe its something like she talks about, that people have reached a higher state and phased out of our density while still here and they are among us now but not physically. when I heard her mention this I was reminded of the SG-1 sci-fi series and one episode of that was about this phasing.

some people dont get the mandela effect or are affected by it but for those of us that do, it kinda changes everything, its like the lid on the box of thinking we are in opens up and nothing is off the table anymore. all things considered.

ME doesnt freak me out at all, its exciting IMO
 
Top