The New World wasn't new at all! An Alternative Timeline.

OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
217
Reactions
923
As of June 2017 there have been few implements found in the Americas that date from the Bronze Age (Please see Discussion). Nevertheless, there is considerable evidence of a voyage or voyages of a Bronze Age Scandinavian king, Woden-lithi, to North America around 1700 B.C. from texts found inscribed in the rocks at Peterborough, Ontario, Canada (Figs. 18 & 19 & MAP), and other North American sites. (Figs. 18 & 19 & MAP), and other sites. These texts, written in Teutonic and Norse tongues, used alphabets that have survived to the present in remote parts of the world. However, in Europe Roman script became the predominant alphabet around the time of Christ as part of the general occupation. They support the belief that Europeans during the Bronze Age were literate, educated people. Harvard Professor Barry Fell (1982) has attempted to translate the inscriptions to about October 2000. Expected widespread criticism of such new ideas flooded the archeological world (see Comments). Yet by the year 2005 there has emerged a revolution in American prehistory that may finally remove antiquated biases and enable concerted efforts at learning and dispelling myths about colonization in America (please refer to Nyland’s accounts). The evidence points to the certainty that European colonists and traders have been visiting or settling in the Americas for thousands of years, have introduced their scripts, artifacts, and skills, and have exported abroad American products such as copper and furs. The voyages occurred just as the Iron Age was beginning, so that the explorers might have brought with them implements of iron instead of bronze (see Picture), and most could have eventually rusted away.
Bronze Age Visitors in America
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,394
Reactions
4,383
You say the Venicians/Phoenicians had a legitimate claim to North America because they stuck a pole quilt in the ground? The inhabitants that were already here may have (and did) disagree.

There's ample evidence of multiple cultures having arrived in N. A. before Columbus. You might be surprised to learn that the very oldest relics found here are Japanese (Ainu). I know I was.
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,394
Reactions
4,383
Yes they do. They're a bit of a cliquish group too from what I understand, keeping mostly to themselves.
 
OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
217
Reactions
923
You say the Venicians/Phoenicians had a legitimate claim to North America because they stuck a pole quilt in the ground? The inhabitants that were already here may have (and did) disagree.

There's ample evidence of multiple cultures having arrived in N. A. before Columbus. You might be surprised to learn that the very oldest relics found here are Japanese (Ainu). I know I was.
That's actually what I'm hinting at when I talk about the Conquistadors having a hundred year head start. The Spanish empire was desperate to make sure they could claim the new world for the Pope and the Pope alone. John Cabot upset that plan.

Yes, I think it's goofy that planting a pole on a land somehow means it's yours, especially when it's already occupied. But those were the rules of those zany Europeans. Most people don't think of it, but Savages were just recently conquered in Europe itself. Look back at "ancient" history and notice that nation states are only a recent invention. Before then, you have city state alliances. Who lived outside the city beyond the farmers? Savages. They were were everywhere. Then they were conquered. The same mindset was fresh in the mind of Europe and they saw it as a good thing to do, so why wouldn't that carry over to the new world?


The Magellan–Elcano circumnavigation was the first voyage around the world in human history. It was a Spanish expedition that sailed from Seville in 1519 under the command of Ferdinand Magellan, a Portuguese, in search of a maritime path from Spain to East Asiathrough the Americas and across the Pacific Ocean, and concluded by Spanish navigator Juan Sebastian Elcano in 1522. Elcano and the 18 survivors of the expedition were the first men to circumnavigate the globe in a single expedition.
Timeline of the Magellan–Elcano circumnavigation - Wikipedia

As for the Ainu, I'm going to dig into it a bit but that doesn't surprise me at all. In fact, it's SHOCKING that it was the West that apparently discovered America first, considering it would have been SO MUCH EASIER to go across the Pacific. Consider also that maybe only 50 years after we discover the New World, we're suddenly having ships circumnavigating the entire world.

And Ainu looked pretty european. Go figure.
Wow.

ainu-mens[1].jpg

I took a quick look at the DNA of the Ainu, seems to be LEGIT:

native-mt-hap-d-heat-d2[1].png

Looks like they settled in the mid west near California?

Also, check out Haplogroup X, which totally coincides with my original post:

native-mt-hap-x-heat[1].png

Got these from this site here:
New Native American Mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups

Tons of data there!!
 
Last edited:

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,394
Reactions
4,383
"The Ainu, the Indigenous people of Japan, have fought Japanese domination for centuries." ***Why, if they're inherently Japanese?***

ainu_2.jpg

ainu.jpgainu_1.jpg

Funny, they're considered the aboriginal people of Japan yet are hairy and have epicanthal folds (like Europeans). Where did the Japanese come from?
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,394
Reactions
4,383
Personally, I think Pangea (one big world island) was a real thing and whoever was left and survived where they were when the landmass broke apart are considered "indigenous" when survivors from other lands showed up there.
 
OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
217
Reactions
923
And the question could be asked a bit wider. Where do all people presented to us as indigenous come from? For it appears that none of them truly are.
Some in the East literally think that America should be owned by them as their decedents claimed the land long before the Europeans (except, never mind that the rule of being conquered negates this premise completely). In Canada this is picking up steam, Trudeau is on full apology mode and every government meeting always starts by acknowledging what Native land you're currently on. In other words, Canada is constantly acknowledging that it's someone else's land. So what? Well, if that's the case, couldn't the mother countries of those haplogroups make a legitimate claim on the land and also demand war crime reparations? Sounds crazy, but we live in crazy times.

Personally, I think Pangea (one big world island) was a real thing and whoever was left and survived where they were when the landmass broke apart are considered "indigenous" when survivors from other lands showed up there.
Possibly. I think the landbridge during Ice Ages does make more sense, because if we want to go back to a Pangea state we're talking MILLIONS of years (assuming continental drift is a relatively constant speed throughout time of course)

pangea_politik[1].jpg


This makes me wonder if any scientists have actually calculated the vectors of the drift to see if such an arrangement actually does come together if you wind back the clock. For fun, since it's remotely relevant, I present to you the expanding earth hypothesis:

GIndian[1].jpg
 

PrincepAugus

Well-known member
Messages
431
Reactions
836
I subscribe to the "shrinking Earth" theory instead, since I don't think the Earth is gaining mass but rather losing it. Continents split and move because of the contraction of the Earth, like stretch marks. Of course, combined with the Electric universe and that is the geology and history of the Earth.
 

tyler durden

Member
Messages
25
Reactions
128
Only partly true in my opinion. (op)
Your approach reminds me of the greenland theory - Greenland Theory, which is again a bit tainted, but can open your eyes on a number of very interesting ideas.
My take on it is the following..

On a psychological level you have a conflict between 2 ways of living, worldviews, mentalities..
1. the people of the land - kingdom - self sovereignty - alligning to truth, nature in order to survive - morality, ethics
2. the people of the sea - empire - rule over others - making others allign to your rules / lies - deceptive tactics

By kingdom I don't mean the conventional meaning. In an ideal world perhaps each should be his own king in the sense that you freedom stops where your neighbour's begins. My point is that each should exercise control and command, but only where it is due - upon your own self, you should control yourself and command yourself.

Now empire.. empire IS a state of mind, it's a way of looking at things and saying 'mine, mine, mine, ummmm... mine!', it's a parasitical approach to life. How does an empire expand? It transforms things into it, provinces that were once independent, sovereign are transformed into parts of the empire. History is erased, culture is erased, language is erased, morality is erased. How was this usually done? It's pretty straightforward..
- they killed them all.
- they killed almost all of them until the remaining ones submitted to the will of the conquerors.
- they killed a lot of them and moved the remaining ones in other provinces of the empire in order to uproot them, make them lose their identity.
- they just 'bought' those that could 'be bought' in order to carry out their machinations and weakening them preparing them for one of the previous 3 options.
You might ask why kill people.. It's the only way to erase history, culture, language, morality and so on.. The information by itself is meaningless, we the people are the only ones that attribute meaning to things, it is only within us that these things are activated.

Anyway, in a nutshell.. I always associate the idea of 'empire' with this sort of a line:
'I don't really care what you guys were doing here before, this is how things are gonna be from now on: [...]'

Getting back to the original post, my personal opinion after some considerable research is that there really is only one empire. (in the sense I was explaining before) So for me the minoans are the phoenicians, the venetians, the carthagenians, the romans.. etc.
In my opinion it's like they tried to fake their own death/demise several times. All empires are colonial empires, with over-seas territories and so on.
In conventional history what was once a phoenician collony then became greek, then roman, then venetian, then spanish, then british, then dutch, then portuguese.. (I'm just trying to prove a point, not talking about a specific place) In reality it was simply always theirs, they just made use of the apparent conflict between their opposing factions to have an excuse to cover their own tracks or destroy whatever unexplainable thing remained from the previous 'worldwide civilization' I haven't even touched upon yet.
In more recent times the empire acts as warring opponents and the whole 'age of exploration', the whole 'new world' discourse is sold like this.. the pope vs the english, the spanish vs. the portuguese, the spanish vs the english, the english vs. the dutch. Just think about it, how effective a tactic it is to instigate conflict all over the world. It's controlling the discourse so that the proper questions don't get asked. Just like the conflict between the spanish and the portuguese in South America.. who cares there were some natives around? collateral damage, what matters is who won.

For me the whole 'new world' thing is fascinating. Think about the arrogance it takes to claim whole populated continents as your own and on top of that even the audacity to call them 'new'. I mean obviously it wasn't new to the people there.. but when it comes to the empire it's all about 'me,me,me', so that's how they sold it to us, trying to lend us their looking glasses so we look at the world in the same way they do and see nothing wrong with it.

I can only think of one way of ending this.. who's the savage?

ps: Some that enter this 'conspiracy circle' / truth quest start with the idea that the system has to change, that it's not working any more, it's failing.. I say it's working perfectly. It's not broken, it was built this way. It's just a matter of perspective, of zooming out of your comfort zone.
ps2: funfact: the Roman empire collapsed 1453. 'Columbus' 'discovered' 'America' in '1492'. I'll just leave it at that.
 
OP
mythstifieD

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
217
Reactions
923
I just came across some fascinating evidence! Look at this coin from Tyre (a Phoenician city state)

moneymisterymagick02_11.jpg

Here you see the Pillars of Hercules, and beyond that? The garden of eden/tree of knowledge,... Beyond the pillars?.... IN AMERICA?!

Also look clo$ely at the $nake coiled around the tree.... Funny how our money here is the same thing! $$$
 

Tonep

Active member
Messages
84
Reactions
237
Some in the East literally think that America should be owned by them as their decedents claimed the land long before the Europeans (except, never mind that the rule of being conquered negates this premise completely). In Canada this is picking up steam, Trudeau is on full apology mode and every government meeting always starts by acknowledging what Native land you're currently on. In other words, Canada is constantly acknowledging that it's someone else's land. So what? Well, if that's the case, couldn't the mother countries of those haplogroups make a legitimate claim on the land and also demand war crime reparations? Sounds crazy, but we live in crazy times.



Possibly. I think the landbridge during Ice Ages does make more sense, because if we want to go back to a Pangea state we're talking MILLIONS of years (assuming continental drift is a relatively constant speed throughout time of course)

View attachment 7401

This makes me wonder if any scientists have actually calculated the vectors of the drift to see if such an arrangement actually does come together if you wind back the clock. For fun, since it's remotely relevant, I present to you the expanding earth hypothesis:

are there any threads on the expanding earth theory. this resonates with me
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,394
Reactions
4,383
"Some in the East literally think that America should be owned by them as their decedents claimed the land long before the Europeans (except, never mind that the rule of being conquered negates this premise completely)."

Some famous underwater explorer found a long lost Roman ship off the Brazilian coast that predated Brazilian civilization. The Italians decided to claim Brazil as their own since there was now evidence to show they were there before Brazilians. Brazilian government shut that nonsense down and outlawed any further undersea exploration. They are aware of over 100 sunken ships off their coast but no one is allowed to explore them and they're certainly not allowed to bring anything up from the ships. Italians ruined it for everyone. Seems kind of counterproductive, too, since it leaves whatever priceless relics that are on those ships wide open to relic hunters.
 

WorldWar1812

Active member
Messages
93
Reactions
242
Personally I'd like to avoid talking about Russia as I don't know enough about it. But the little I know makes me suspect that Peter was erasing history. He "westernized" Russia, but at what cost? He reigns in 1682. I may be wrong about this, but when do your maps stop showing Tartaria? Could he have been some sort of operative for the history erasers?
PETER I THE GREAT "founded" Saint Petersburg, most incredible city (under artistic point of view) in the whole world. (We know here was not founded by him).
PETER brang to russians the europe-french high aristocracy way of life. So it's said Peter showed to russians "how to live".
PETER killed his own son (very strange, this comes almost to a sort of coup d'etat turned to be a familiy problem). Really bizarre.

Why Peter the Great Tortured and Killed His Own Son

PETER moods, manners were like western europeans (mainly anglo-ducth), it's said spoke very poor russian, and better french.

What if SAINT PETERSBURG was the world capital christian city (SAINT PETER/ROME), and due to weather changes (really cold there), VATICAN was moved to current Rome?
Gizeh (Ancient Prime Meridian)-Saint Petersbourg and North Geographic Pole are perfectly alligned.

Why do you build lots of channels in a city that has several months frozen waters?. So bizarre.

I recommend all of you, A.Sokhurov movie "RUSSIAN ARK", it's funny, and full of ironic talking about people that suddenly, just from one day to other "learnt" to speak russian almost as well as russians can do.......

 

Top